Dismissed

Nur Mahammad Ali v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC4 Nov 2022WP(C)/2697/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court dismissed the writ petition through a joint submission. The court closed the matter without examining merits, directing the Forest Department to communicate the State Level Committee's decision on compassionate appointment to the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is closed without going into merits; the decision of the State Level Committee regarding compassionate appointment must be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

Nur Mahammad Ali Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors. — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010089572020

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/2697/2020

¶5

NUR MAHAMMAD ALI

¶6

S/O- LATE MAKCHER ALI, R/O- WARD NO. 8, BARAMA ROAD, NALBARI, P.O- NALBARI, DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM, PIN- 781335

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, FOREST DEPTT, ASSAM SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 06

¶9

2:THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM DISPUR GHY- 06 ASSAM

¶10

3:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS ARANYA BHAWAN PANJABARI GUWAHATI- 37 ASSAM 4:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER NORTH KAMRUP DIVISION RANGIA P.O- RANGIA DIST- KAMRUP PIN- 781354 5:THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST CENTRAL ASSAM CIRCLE GUWAHATI

¶11

Page No.# 2/3

¶12

GUWAHATI- 03 ASSA

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J KALITA

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FOREST

¶15

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Date : 04-11-2022

¶18

Heard Mr. J. Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Forest Department for the respondent nos. 1, 3, 4 & 5.

¶19

Mr. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Forest Department has submitted that the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment is going to be placed by the respondent Forest Department in the next State Level Committee [SLC] meeting. Mr. Gogoi has submitted that he has made this statement on the basis of the statements made in the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no. 3.

¶20

Mr. Kalita and Mr. Gogoi have submitted, in unison, that this writ petition can, therefore, be disposed of, without going into the merits of the claim of the petitioner, with an observation that the outcome of the decision of the State level Committee [SLC] taken in respect of the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment its next meeting be communicated to the petitioner thereafter.

¶21

In view of the above joint submission made by Mr. Kalita and Mr. Gogoi, this writ petition stands closed, without going into the merits of the claim of the

¶22

Page No.# 3/3

¶23

petitioner, with the observation that the decision to be taken by the State Level Committee [SLC] in respect of the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment, be communicated to the petitioner herein forthwith thereafter. The petitioner will be at liberty to seek appropriate remedy in the event he is aggrieved by the decision so taken by the State Level Committee [SLC].

¶24

Comparing Assistant

Nur Mahammad Ali v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nur Mahammad Ali v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukut Das Vs the Assam Power Generation Corporation Ltd. and 4 Ors.

Hitesh Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Ambia Khatun Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Miss. Aklima Khatun Vs Udayan Hazarika and 3 Ors.

Abhijit Deori Vs the Oil India Ltd. and 2 Ors.

R C Agansimani (Ramnath Chintaman a) Vs Additional Director General and Anr.