Contempt petitioner sought relief for alleged violation of a past court order regarding selection for an advertised post. The court found the petition fit for no contempt and allowed withdrawal with liberty to file appropriate proceedings.
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
GAHC010181022024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/469/2024
APURBA KUMAR KALITA
S/O- LATE DHIREN CH. KALITA, R/O- RADHALAYA, GANESH MANDIR PATH, H/NO. 12, BYE LANE NO. 8, NOONMATI, GHY-781020.
VERSUS
INDRANOSHEE DAS PROJECT DIRECTOR, ASSAM STATE AIDS CONTROL SOCIETY, KHANAPARA, GUWAHATI -22.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M J QUADIR, MR. A K HANNAN
Advocate for the Respondent : ,
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO
ORDER
06.09.2024
Heard Mr. M.J. Quadir, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that this contempt petition has been filed for wilful and deliberate violation of this Court’s order dated 02.11.2021 passed in WP(C) 7629/2019 along with other writ petitions. He submits that although the writ petition was dismissed on ground of abolition of post,
Page No.# 2/2
an observation was made that past experience should be given due weightage as and when equivalent posts are being filled up by the respondents. He submits that although the petitioner participated for the post of Divisional Assistant advertised under the Assam State AIDS Control Society, but he was not selected for the post. He submits that the petitioner has not been communicated why he has not been selected as well.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
APURBA KUMAR KALITA
INDRANOSHEE DAS PROJECT DIRECTOR ASSAM STATE AIDS CONTROL SOCIETY KHANAPARA GUWAHATI
NELSON SAILO
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
