SHAHI ZAMAN SK Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A. R. Sikdar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. D. P. Borah, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Health Department. I have also heard Mr. R. Dhar, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Accountant General.

(2.) The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner was appointed as a Ward Boy vide an order dtd. 7/7/2018 in the Model Hospital of the District under the Directorate of Health Services. Pursuant to the order of appointment dtd. 7/7/2018, the petitioner joined on 9/7/2018. It further appears that vide an order dtd. 23/7/2018, the petitioner was posted as the Ward Boy in Kismat Hasdaha (Kalahat) Model Hospital and was placed in the Dumordaha MPHC due to non-functioning of the Kismat Hasdaha (Kalahat) Model Hospital. Subsequent thereto, the petitioner joined on 24/7/2018 in the Dumordaha MPHC. However, vide an order dtd. 10/12/2018 on the ground that the age mentioned in the PwD Certificate was 58 years, the appointment order of the petitioner dtd. 7/7/2018 was cancelled. The petitioner being aggrieved challenged the said order dtd. 10/12/2018 in WP(C) No.606/2019.

(3.) This Court vide an order dtd. 30/1/2019 stayed the order dtd. 10/12/2018 till the returnable date and the petitioner was allowed to resume his service. It appears that the petitioner thereupon on 16/2/2019 submitted his joining report and the petitioner was thereupon allowed to render his services. Subsequent thereto, the said writ petition i.e. WP(C) No.606/2019 was closed and the petitioner was allowed to serve as a Ward Boy in terms with his earlier appointment order dtd. 7/7/2018. It was however observed that if the authorities have any issue with regard to the appointment of the petitioner, they must inform the petitioner before taking any adverse action.