Disposed

Dr. Nani Gopal Goswami and Anr. v. Mukesh Chandra Sahu, IAS

Gauhati HC16 Jul 2024Cont.Cas(C)/239/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt proceedings alleging non-compliance of a 2020 writ order. The court found substantial compliance, no willful disobedience, closed the contempt petition, and left the petitioner free to challenge the amount released before an appropriate forum.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition closed; liberty to challenge the disputed amount in an appropriate forum.

Dr. Nani Gopal Goswami and Anr. Vs Mukesh Chandra Sahu, IAS — Contempt of Court | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010080572022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/239/2022

¶5

DR. NANI GOPAL GOSWAMI AND ANR

¶6

FORMER MEMBER OF ASCPCR, S/O- LT. NARENDRA NATH GOSWAMI, R/OHOUSE NO. 2, GHARMARA, SATRAPATH, GEETANAGAR, P.S.- NOONMATI, GUWAHATI, DIST.- KAMRUP(M), ASSAM. PIN- 781020.

¶7

2: RAJESWAR SARMA FORMER MEMBER OF ASCPCR S/O- LT. MANIK CHANDRA SARMA PRESENT R/O- HOUSE NO. 50 B.R. MEDHI ROAD LATASIL GUWAHATI DIST.- KAMRUP(M) ASSAM PIN- 781001

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

MUKESH CHANDRA SAHU, IAS

¶10

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY -CUM-COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, ASSAM SECRETARIAT, JANATA BHAWAN, DISPUR, GUWAHATI DISTRICTKAMRUP(METRO), ASSAM, PIN- 781006.

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U K NAIR

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent :

¶13

Page No.# 2/2

¶14

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

¶15

ORDER

¶16

17.07.2024

¶17

Heard Shri MP Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Shri R Dhar, learned counsel appearing for the sole respondent.

¶18

Shri Dhar, learned counsel by referring to the affidavit-in-opposition dated 24.11.2022 has submitted that the order dated 16.03.2020 passed in WP(C)/5168/2014 has been complied with.

¶19

Shri Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that there is a dispute with regard to the amount released.

¶20

A Court adjudicating a petition wherein there is complaint of non-compliance is required to be prima facie satisfied as to whether such non-compliance is willful and deliberate.

¶21

In the instant case, it is seen that there is substantial compliance with the aforesaid order of this Court and therefore, there is no reason to keep this contempt petition alive.

¶22

Accordingly, the contempt petition stands closed, however, giving liberty to the petitioner to make a challenge in an appropriate forum regarding the amount involved.

¶23

JUDGE

¶24

Comparing Assistant

Dr. Nani Gopal Goswami and Anr. v. Mukesh Chandra Sahu, IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Nani Gopal Goswami and Anr. v. Mukesh Chandra Sahu, 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

Abdul Hamid Sarkar Vs Khanindra Choudhury

Madhusudan Baishya Vs Dr. Aswani Kumar, IFS

The Assam Co-Operative Jute Mill Workers Federation Vs Gunamoni Gogoi

Amal Kumar Boruah Vs Mamata Hojai

Smt. Lalhlunthangi and Anr. Vs Dr. Renu Sharma, Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Mizoram and 3 Ors.

Uttam Kr Roy Vs Narayan Konwar and 3 Ors.

Abutalha MD Samsuzzuha Vs Suranjana Senapati , Acs

Tilok Gaon Ranchaidhan Samabai Samity (Trss) Vs Habibur Rahman

Siva Prasad Bora and 16 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Smti Parvinara Begum Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Niru Kalita Baruah and 10 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Bhabananda Pathak Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Chandan Uria and Anr. Vs the Chairman, Assam Power Distribution Company Ltd. and 14 Ors.

Sri Dandi Ram Kalita and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.