R C Agansimani (Ramnath Chintaman a) Vs Dr Ajay Kumar, IAS… — Contempt of Court | Gauhati HC (2026)

R C Agansimani (Ramnath Chintaman a) Vs Dr Ajay Kumar, IAS… — Contempt of Court | Gauhati HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the contempt petition was closed in view of the petitioner's voluntary retirement (effective 01.08.2021) and release of outstanding dues, no further compliance of the 10.05.2021 order having been found necessary.

Issue for consideration

Whether there was willful and deliberate violation of the order dated 10.05.2021 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 2903/2021, warranting contempt proceedings. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

In view of the petitioner's voluntary retirement w.e.f. 01.08.2021 having been duly accepted and all outstanding dues released, there is no requirement of further compliance of the order dated 10.05.2021 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 2903/2021.

Key takeaways

Accordingly, the present contempt petition stands closed.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court, Arun Dev Choudhury, J. (order dated 16.02.2026) in Contempt Case (C) No. 504/2021 filed by a retired Executive Engineer (Civil), NFSG, alleging willful and deliberate violation of this Court's order dated 10.05.2021 in WP(C) No. 2903/2021, by which a Coordinate Bench had directed respondent No. 7 therein to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 27.03.2021 within two weeks of receipt of the certified copy of the order. The sole respondent had forwarded the representation to the competent authority for holding DPC on 30.03.2021 and 07.04.2021, and again forwarded similar requests on 13.05.2025 and 31.05.2021 (as printed). During pendency, the petitioner sought voluntary retirement w.e.f. 01.08.2021 on 06.07.2021, which was duly accepted, with all outstanding dues released. Finding that no further compliance of the 10.05.2021 order appeared necessary in view of this development, the Court held that there was no requirement of further compliance and closed the contempt petition. Respondents named in the caption included officers of the Ministry of Defence and the Border Roads Organisation (Directors General Border Roads, Defence Secretary and Joint Secretaries); no statute or precedent was cited in the order.

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010225792021

2026:GAU-AS:2228

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

Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/504/2021

R C AGANSIMANI (RAMNATH CHINTAMAN A)

RETIRED EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, GO-2492H, EE (CIVIL), NFSG R/O 125/1, 9TH CROSS, HMT LAYOUT/NISARGA LAYOUT MALLATHAHALLI, WARD NO. 72, VISHWA NEEDAM, P.O., BENGALURU-560091

VERSUS

DR AJAY KUMAR, IAS AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, R.NO. 101-A, SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110011

2:SATISH SINGH IRSME JOINT SECRETARY (BORDER ROADS ORGANISATION) MINISTRY OF DEFENCE B-WING 4TH FLOOR SENA BHAWAN NEW DELHI-110011

3:LT. GENERAL RAJEV KUMAR CHAUDHRY VSM THE DIRECTOR GENERAL BORDER ROADS HQ DGBR SEEM SADAK BHAWAN NEW DELHI-110010

4:SHRI RAKESH KUMAR SINGH DEFENCE SECRETARY GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF DEFENCE

Page No.# 2/3

R NO.101-A SOUTH BLOCK NEW DELHI-110011.

5:SHRI RAKESH MITTAL JOINT SECRETARY BORDER ROADS ORGANISATION MINISTRY OF DEFENCE B-WING 4TH FLOOR SENA BHAWAN NEW DELHI-110011.

6:LT. GENERAL RAGHU SRINIVASAN VSM THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF BORDER ROADS HQ DGBR SEEMA SADAK BHAWAN NEW DELHI-11001

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. N UPADHYAY, MR. D DEKA,MR. R MAZUMDAR,MR. A BHATTACHARJEE,MS. K MALAKAR,MS K TALUKDAR,MR. A BHATTACHARYA

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. S S ROY (r-3),

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

ORDER

16.02.2026

Heard Mr. A. Bhatacharya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. S. Roy, learned counsel for the respondents.

The present contempt petition is filed alleging willful and deliberate violation of order dated 10.05.2021 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 2903/2021.

By the aforesaid order, a Coordinate Bench directed the respondent No. 7, therein to dispose of the representation dated 27.03.2021 filed by the petitioner within a period of 2 (two) weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of

Page No.# 3/3

the order.

The sole respondent forwarded the aforesaid representation by a communication dated 30.03.2021, to the competent authority for holding DPC in terms of order passed. Subsequently, by a communication dated 07.04.2021, same was again forwarded. Thereafter, the sole respondent also forwarded the similar request on 13.05.2025 and 31.05.2021.

During pendency, on 06.07.2021, the petitioner sought for voluntary retirement w.e.f. 01.08.2021, which was duly accepted and all outstanding dues were released.

In view of the aforesaid development, this court is of the opinion that there may not be any requirement of further compliance of order dated 10.05.2021 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 2903/2021.

Accordingly, the present contempt petition stands closed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant