Allowed

Sushila Karmakar v. Sri. M.S. Manivannan, IAS

Gauhati HC16 Dec 2021I.A.(Civil)/1953/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed an interlocutory application seeking impleadment of new respondents (Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner) in a connected application due to the retirement and transfer of previously impleaded incumbents, also permitting typographical corrections in the title.

What did the court decide?

Impleadment of the two new parties as respondents in the connected application allowed; correction of the cause title permitted.

Sushila Karmakar Vs Sri. M.S. Manivannan, IAS — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010177522021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1953/2021

¶5

SUSHILA KARMAKAR

¶6

D/O-LATE THAKUR KARMAKAR, VILL NO. 2 PANBARI, P.O- PANBARI BAZAR, P.S- KACHUGAON, DIST- KOKRAJHAR, BTAD, ASSAM, PIN- 783350

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

SRI. M.S. MANIVANNAN, IAS COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPTT, RELIEF AND REHABILITATION BRANCH, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 06

¶9

2:SMTI. VARNALI DEKA IAS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM P.O AND P.S- KOKRAJHAR DIST- KOKRAJHAR BTAD ASSAM PIN- 78337

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M R KHANDAKAR

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent :

¶12

Page No.# 2/3

¶13

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶14

ORDER

¶15

16.12.2021

¶16

Heard Mr. M.R. Khandakar, learned counsel for the applicant.

¶17

This interlocutory has been filed by the applicant seeking impleadment of the following parties –

¶18

[i] Sri M.S. Manivannan, IAS,

¶19

Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Revenue & Disaster Management Department, Relief & Rehabilitation Branch, Dispur, Guwahati – 06.

¶20

[ii] Smti. Varnali Deka, IAS,

¶21

Deputy Commissioner, Kokrajhar, BTAD, Assam, P.O. & P.S. – Kokrajhar, District – Kokrajhar, BTAD, Assam, PIN - 783380

¶22

as party-respondents in the connected application, Cont.Case [C] no. 680/2019.

¶23

It has been averred that earlier incumbent in the post of Commissioner Secretary to the Government of Assam, Revenue & Disaster Management Department, who was impleaded as partyrespondent no. 1 in the connected application, Cont.Case [C] no. 680/2019 had retired from service and the present opposite-party no. 1 Sri M.S. Manivannan has joined in the said post. On the other hand, the incumbent in the post of Deputy Commissioner, Kokrajhar who was impleaded as party-respondent no. 2 in the connected application, Cont.Case [C] no. 680/2019 has been transferred from the said post in the meantime and the opposite party no. 2, Smti. Varnali Deka has joined as a Deputy Commissioner, Kokrajhar and is presently serving in the said post.

¶24

Having regard to the aforesaid averments, this interlocutory application is allowed.

¶25

The opposite party no. 1 and the opposite party no. 2, indicated hereinabove, be impleaded as party-respondent no. 3 and the party-respondent no. 4 respectively, in the connected application, Cont.Case [C] no. 680/2019.

¶26

The Registry to cause necessary correction in the cause-title of the connected application, Cont.Case [C] no. 680/2019 and to list the case thereafter in the next week.

¶27

Page No.# 3/3

¶28

Mr. Khandakar, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that due to inadvertence, in the cause-title of the present interlocutory application, he has made some typographical errors and he may be permitted to correct the same.

¶29

The prayer made by Mr. Khandakar is allowed.

¶30

Mr. Khandakar shall cause necessary correction in the cause-title of this interlocutory application under his own handwriting during the course of the day in presence of the Court Master.

¶31

The interlocutory application stands disposed of.

¶32

JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Sushila Karmakar v. Sri. M.S. Manivannan, IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushila Karmakar v. Sri. M.S. Manivannan, IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Durlav Raj Saikia and Anr, Vs the United Bank of India and 2 Ors.

Mala Dutta and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Krishna Kamal Borgohain Vs Hdfc Bank Ltd.

Gadu Ram Rabha and 15 Ors. Vs the Power Grid Corpn. of India Ltd. and 3 Ors.

Baburam Murmu Vs Sri. M.S. Manivanan, IAS and Anr.

Ravindra Singh Vs the State of Assam