In contempt proceedings, the respondent lawyer submits the petitioner's earlier orders were complied with. The Chief Justice discharges the rule, closing the matter.
Rule discharged; contempt proceedings closed.
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.# 1/2
GAHC010212972022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/578/2022
RITAMONI BARALUA
W/O HEMANTA BHARALUA, R/O VILL-GOGAMUKH, P.S. AND P.O.GOGAMUKH, DIST-DHEMAJI, ASSAM, PIN-787034
VERSUS
DR. OM PRAKASH, IAS MISSION DIRECTOR, AXOM SARBA SIKSHA ABHIJAN MISSION, KAHILIPARA, GUWAHATI, PIN-781019
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P. Mahanta, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Choudhury, Adv.
BEFORE
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
ORDER
02.05.2023
Mr. B. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the sole respondent submits that the case of the petitioner was considered in light of the direction of
Page No.# 2/2
this Court vide order dated 10.08.2022 and a reasoned order dated 17.11.2022 (duly communicated to the petitioner) was passed with the conclusion that the petitioner is not entitled with the salary for the relevant months as indicated in the order dated 10.08.2022.
In this view of the matter, manifestly the order under contempt has been complied with. As such, the contempt proceedings are closed, Rule is discharged.
Sd/- Sandeep Mehta CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
Ritamon Baralua
Dr. Om Prakash
Sandeep Mehta
As recorded by the court registry
Proceedings for wilful disobedience of a court order under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
