Dismissed¶33

Sri Mrinal Jyoti Choudhury v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Writ petition – Transfer – Block MIS Co-ordinator under Samagra Siksha Axom

Gauhati HC2 Feb 2026WP(C)/536/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court, WP(C)/536/2026, Justice Devashis Baruah, order dated 03.02.2026: writ petition against transfer order dated 22.01.2026 of a Block MIS Co-ordinator (Samagra Siksha Axom) from Balijana Block, Goalpara to Sidli Block, Chirang, on grounds of medical ailment/hardship; post held transferable; limited judicial review of transfers in administrative exigency; petition dismissed with protective observation on petitioner's representation to respondent No. 2.

What did the court decide?

It was shown by the materials on record, and the submission of counsel for respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4, that the petitioner's post is transferable. ¶32

Sri Mrinal Jyoti Choudhury Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010019202026

2026:GAU-AS:1463

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/536/2026

¶6

SRI MRINAL JYOTI CHOUDHURY

¶7

S/O- LT. NRIPENDRA KUMAR CHOUDHURY, R/O- VILL. AND P.O.- MANIARI TINIALI, P.S.- PALASHBARI, PIN- 781125, DISTRICT- KAMRUP (R), ASSAM

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS

¶10

REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, SCHOOL EDUCATION (ELEMENTARY) DEPARTMENT, ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006

¶11

2:THE MISSION DIRECTOR SAMAGRA SIKSHA AXOM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI- 781019

¶12

3:THE DISTRICT MISSION CO-ORDINATOR SAMAGRA SIKSHA AXOM GOALPARA PIN- 783101

¶13

4:THE DISTRICT MISSION CO-ORDINATOR SAMAGRA SIKSHA AXOM CHIRANG PIN- 783385

¶14

5:ROFIQUL ISLAM S/O- ABDUR RAHMAN R/O- VILL.- MILAN NAGAR SAMNTIPUR (NEAR DURGA MANDIR) P.O.- BALADMARI P.S.- GOALPARA SADAR

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

DISTRICT- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 78312

¶17

Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. K Kalita

¶18

Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. S Bora, Standing Counsel,

¶19

SSA

¶20

B E F O R E

¶21

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

¶22

ORDER

¶23

03.02.2026

¶24

Heard Mr. K Kalita, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. I have also heard Mr. S Bora, learned Standing Counsel who appears on behalf of the SSA.

¶25

Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, this Court dispenses with the notice as regards the respondent Nos.5 and 6.

¶26

The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the order of transfer dated 22.01.2026 whereby the petitioner who is the Block MIS Co-ordinator and presently posted at Balijana Block of Goalpara was transferred to Sidli Block of Chirang.

¶27

The grounds on which the petitioner has challenged the transfer order is that the petitioner would have inconvenience if he has to join his new place of posting at Sidli Block of Chirang on account of medical ailment of himself and his family members.

¶28

Page No.# 3/3

¶29

It is an admitted fact that the mother of the petitioner as well as the sister are residents of Mirza in the district of Kamrup (Rural).

¶30

This Court enquired with the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as to whether the petitioner resides at Goalpara or Mirza, taking into account that the petitioner was appointed as a Block MIS Co-ordinator at Balijana Block of Goalpara. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner for the purpose of his work, resides at Goalpara, but it is easier for him to reach Mirza taking into account that the distance is shorter than that from Chirang.

¶31

This Court has also taken note of that the petitioner was transferred to the Balijana Block of Goalpara in the year 2012 and for the last 14 years, the petitioner is in the said Office.

¶32

The materials on record as well as the submission of Mr. S Bora, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 show that the petitioner’s post is transferable.

¶33

Considering the above, this Court, is not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition taking into account the limited scope of judicial review in respect to a transfer being made in administrative exigency. Accordingly, this Court, therefore, dismisses the instant writ petition.

¶34

Before parting with the records, this Court, however, observes that the dismissal of the writ petition shall not affect or prejudice the writ petitioner upon his representation is considered by the respondent No.2.

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

Comparing Assistant

Sri Mrinal Jyoti Choudhury v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Mrinal Jyoti Choudhury v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanju Kr. Deori and 15 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Monoj Kumar Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Tamijul Ali Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Maya Brahma Barman Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Sri Manu Chaudhary Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Jebina Aktar Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.