In a writ petition regarding PSO rights, the Gauhati High Court held the petition premature as no official notification withdrawing the benefit had been issued by the State Government or Police authorities.
The writ petition stands disposed of as it is held to be premature.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010008372022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/317/2022
BHABAKRISHNA BARMAN
S/O LATE PRAFULLA BARMAN
RESIDENT OF AEI ROAD, NEAR INDRADHANU SANGHA, AMIYA NAGAR, CHANDMARI, GUWAHATI 781003, KAMRUP M ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006
2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE HEADQUARTER ULUBARI GUWAHATI 781007
3:THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ( SB) ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI
4:THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
GUWAHATI KAMRUP M ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K ROYCHOUDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
ORDER
03-03-2022
Heard Mr. P. K. Roychoudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. Mozumdar, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam assisted by Mr. D. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
On behalf of the respondents it is placed before the Court that as the payment has already been made by the petitioner upto 07.04.2022 regarding allotment of PSO with him, the same is still in force in terms of the communication dated 08.01.2021 of the Deputy Commissioner of Police (S & I), Guwahati.
It is also placed before the Court that as on date no such Notifications have been issued by the State Government in its Home Department or by Commissioner of Police, Assam regarding withdrawal of PSO. As such, according to the respondents, this writ petition is prematured filed by the petitioner under apprehension, just on a mere statement in a meeting by the Chief Minister of the State regarding withdrawal of PSO’s.
It is a fact that as on date there is no order by the respondents in the State Government in its Home Department regarding withdrawal of PSO from the petitioner which he is having upto 07.04.2022 and as such, considering the above, this writ petition is prematured.
Needless to say that the petitioner may apply for any such PSO after 07.04.2022 before the authority of the State Police and in the event of such approach, the State Police authority as well as State Security Review Committee after examining the matter, may consider such prayer of the petitioner in accordance with law and the relevant Rules in force.
With the above observation, this writ petition being pre-matured, stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Page No.# 3/3
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's writ petition challenging the rights under Presumptive Senior Citizen Order (PSO) is maintainable before an official order withdrawing it was issued.
BHA BAKRISHNA BARMAN
THE STATE OF ASSAM
MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
