Allowed

Md. Abul Kashem v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC12 Sept 2022WP(C)/4542/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought appointment as Gaonburah after a prior selection. A Commissioner had quashed the appointment of a rival candidate and directed the Doucrt to appoint the petitioner within 30 days pending a review. The rival filed no review, so this Court ordered that direction be implemented and the rival removed if holding post.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to issue appointment order in favour of the petitioner as Gaonburah forthwith; respondent no. 4 directed to issue orders for his removal if still holding the post.

Md. Abul Kashem Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010139852021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/4542/2021

¶5

MD. ABUL KASHEM S/O LATE SAFIRUDDIN

¶6

RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BORGHAT, PO RUPAHIHAT, DIST NAGAON, ASSAM, 782125

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

¶9

REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 06

¶10

2:THE COMMISSIONER OF NORTH ASSAM DIVISION TEZPUR DIST SONITPUR ASSAM

¶11

3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

¶12

NAGAON ASSAM 782001

¶13

4:SRI KHAGEN KALITA S/O LATE MOLORAM KALITA VILLAGE HEMARBORI PO BARANGATOLI DIST NAGAON ASSAM 78214

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B RAHMAN

¶15

Page No.# 2/4

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶17

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶18

ORDER

¶19

12.09.2022

¶20

Heard Mr. B. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M.D. Borah, learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 & 3 and Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned counsel for the respondent no.1. None appears for the respondent no.4. However, vide order dated 30.07.2022 passed by this Court, service of notice was said to be complete against the respondent no.4.

¶21

The petitioner’s case is that the petitioner and the respondent no.4 participated in the selection process for appointment to the post of Gaonburah of Borghat Lot/Kisamat under Khatowal Mouza in the district of Nagaon, in pursuant to the Advertisement dated 30.10.2012 and re-Advertisement dated 15.03.2013. The respondent no.4 was selected and appointed as Gaonburah, vide order dated 30.11.2013. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed an Appeal No.2/2014 before the Commissioner, North Assam Division, Tezpur. The Commissioner, North Assam Division, Tezpur, vide order dated 15.10.2014 passed in Appeal No.2/2014, set aside and quashed the order dated 30.11.2013 and directed the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon to consider appointment of the petitioner as Gaonburah within 30 (thirty) days.

¶22

The respondent no.4 filed WP(C) No.6271/2014 before this Court challenging the order dated 15.10.2014 passed by the Commissioner, North

¶23

Page No.# 3/4

¶24

Assam Division, Tezpur in Appeal No.2/2014.

¶25

This Court disposed of WP(C) No.6271/2014, vide judgment and order dated 15.07.2019 by giving liberty to the respondent no.4 to avail the alternative remedy, by filing a review against the order dated 15.10.2014, passed by the Commissioner, North Assam Division, Tezpur in Appeal No.2/2014. This Court in the judgment and order dated 15.07.2019 also directed that for a period of 4 (four) weeks and till a review was filed, status quo in respect of the appointment of the respondent no.4 should continue.

¶26

The petitioner has approached this Court for implementation of the order of the Commissioner, North Assam Division, Tezpur in Appeal No.2/2014, on the ground that no review has been filed by the respondent no.4 till date.

¶27

Ms. M.D. Borah, learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 & 3 and Ms. N. Bordoloi, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 submit that no review has been filed by the respondent no.4 till date.

¶28

As no review has been filed by the respondent no.4 till date against the order dated 15.10.2014 passed by the Commissioner, North Assam Division, Tezpur in Appeal No.2/2014, the order dated 15.10.2014 passed in Appeal No.2/2014 would have to be given effect to. Accordingly the respondents are directed to issue appointment order in favour of the petitioner as Gaonburah of Borghat Lot/Kisamat under Khatowal Mouza in the district of Nagaon, in terms of the order dated 15.10.2014 passed in Appeal No.2/2014 forthwith.

¶29

Page No.# 4/4

¶30

Consequently, if the respondent no.4 is still holding the post of Gaonburah, necessary orders for his removal should be issued.

¶31

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶32

The letter no.RLR.71/2021/59 dated 09.09.2022 issued by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Revenue & DM Department, Dispur, which states that the respondent no.4 has not filed any review petition, is made a part of the record and marked as Annexure-X.

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

Comparing Assistant

Md. Abul Kashem v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Abul Kashem v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

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

Sarbeswar Lahkar Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Narayan Kumar Nath Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Rijumoni Kataki Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Subrata Biswas Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Smt. Rita Das Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Rabhijeet Saikia Vs Managing Director of Idbi Bank and 9 Ors.