Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010084762022 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2961/2022 NIHAR PRASAD SHARMA S/O-LATE BARADA PRASAD SHARMA R/O- FLAT NO. 2B, ARCHON ARCADE DR. B BARUAH ROAD P.O- ULUBARI P.S- PALTAN BAZAR DIST- KAMRUP (M) PRESENTLY RESIDING AT QUARTER NO. D-16, NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD. TOWNSHIP P.O- N.R PROJECT DIST- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM PIN-785699 VERSUS NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED AND 3 ORS A GOVT. OF INDIA ENTERPRISE HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 122A, G.S. ROAD, CHRISTIANBASTI, GUWAHATI-781005, ASSAM 2:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED A GOVT. OF INDIA ENTERPRISE HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 122A G.S. ROAD CHRISTIANBASTI GUWAHATI-781005 ASSAM 3:THE DIRECTOR (TECHNICAL) NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED A GOVT. OF INDIA ENTERPRISE HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 122A Page No.# 2/3 G.S. ROAD CHRISTIANBASTI GUWAHATI-781005 ASSAM 4:SMTI MADHUCHANDA ADHIKARY DGM (CC) PRESIDING OFFICER INTERNAL COMMITTEE FOR SEXUAL HARRASMENT OF WOMEN FOR WORK PLACE NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED A GOVT. OF INDIA ENTERPRISE HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 122A G.S. ROAD CHRISTIANBASTI GUWAHATI-781005 ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P KATAKI, MRS R BEGUM,MS. M DEVI Advocate for the Respondent : MS M HAZARIKA (R-1 to 3), MR D KHAN (R-4),MR D KHAN (R- 1 to 3) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER Date : 06.08.2025 Heard Mr. P. Kakati, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Hazarika, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. D. Khan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the letters dated 30.03.2022 and 20.04.2022, issued by the respondent No.2, whereby an appeal filed by the petitioner was rejected and the petitioner was directed to file written submission before the disciplinary authorities. Page No.# 3/3 It is submitted at the bar that during the pendency of the instance writ petition, the initial report filed by the ICC was set aside and the matter was sent back to the ICC to conclude the proceedings within a reasonable time. It is also submitted at the bar that a review against the aforesaid judgment and order of the co-ordinate Bench of this court was filed; however, the same was dismissed. That being so nothing survives for adjudication in the writ proceedings. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed on being insfructuous. JUDGE Comparing Assistant