Disposed

Nitul Chandra Das v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC12 Nov 2024WP(C)/5864/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner dismissed from service challenged the dismissal and filed an appeal under the Assam Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1964, which remained undisposed. The High Court disposed of the writ petition directing respondent no.1 to consider the appeal under Rule 24 by a speaking order, to be communicated to the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no.1 to consider petitioner's appeal dated 28.10.2024 in terms of Rule 24 of the Assam Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1964 by speaking order, communicated to petitioner.

Nitul Chandra Das Vs the State of Assam and Anr. — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010237542024

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/5864/2024

¶5

NITUL CHANDRA DAS S/O- LATE PHATIK DAS , R/O- VILLAGE AND P.O- BORLIBARI, DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, ASSAM SECRETARIAT, P.O-ASSAM SACHIVALAYA, GUWAHATI-781006

¶8

2:THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR O/O THE SR. SUB REGISTRAR KAMRUP (M) GUWAHATI-3

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K ROYCHOUDHURY, MR M HUSSAIN,MR. N G KUNDU,MR. A K AZAD,MR. N HAQUE

¶10

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE, GA, ASSAM

¶11

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Date : 13-11-2024

¶14

Heard Mr. P.K. Roychoudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶15

Page No.# 2/2

¶16

Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1 and Ms. M. Bhatacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing for respondent no. 2.

¶17

2. Having regard to the nature of the case projected by the petitioner, the writ petition is taken for disposal at the motion stage.

¶18

3. By filing this writ petition the projection made by the petitioner is that he has illegally and arbitrarily being dismissed from service vide the impugned order dated 18.10.2024 (Annexure-F). Being highly aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Rule 13 of the Assam Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1964 before the Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Revenue & Disaster Management Department. However, the same has not been considered and disposed of till date.

¶19

4. Mr. P.K. Roychoudhury, learned counsel submits that the limited prayer of the writ petitioner at this stage is for a direction to the appellate authority to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner and to dispose of the same within a time frame.

¶20

5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents have no objection if the writ petition is disposed of for consideration by the appellate authority.

¶21

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 1 to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner on 28.10.2024 (Annexure-G) in terms of Rule 24 of the Assam Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1964 by way of a Speaking Order which should be invariably communicated to the petitioner.

¶22

JUDGE

¶23

Comparing Assistant

Nitul Chandra Das v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitul Chandra Das v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Murti Roy Vs the Sainik School Society and 3 Ors.

Giti Kakati Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Sahibur Rahman Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Wasim Monsoor Ali Parviz Vs the State of Assam

Khusboo Harlalka Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Dilip Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.