Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010099862024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/275/2024 EX TC NO. 61611 RECT/GD SATISH S/O- OM PRAKASH, R/O- VILL.- PUNCH GAON, P.O. PUNCH GAON, P.S. MANISAR, DIST. GURGAON, HARYANA, PIN- 131021. VERSUS AJAY K. BHALLA AND ANR THE SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-110001. 2:LIEUTENANT GENERAL PRADEEP CHANDRAN NAIR AVSM YSM THE DIRECTOR GENERAL ASSAM RIFLES DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ASSAM RIFLES SHILLONG-11 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R MAZUMDAR, MS T WAPANGLA,MR N ALI,MR. R DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : MR. S S ROY (r-2), BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 21.03.2025 Heard Mr. R. Mazumder, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Page No.# 2/4 A. Deka, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. SS Roy, learned CGC for the respondent no.2. 2. This Contempt Petition is filed alleging willful disobedience of the direction contained in the order dated 15.12.2023 passed in WP(C) No.4700/2019. 3. By the order dated 15.12.2023 passed in WP(C) No.4700/2019, the writ petition was disposed of by holding that the petitioner was entitled for a proper review by a Medical Board and the respondents were directed to constitute a fresh Appeal Medical Board/Review Medical Board within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order for the purpose of examining the medical fitness of the writ petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since this order has not been carried out within the stipulated time frame, this contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner. 4. Today when the matter is called up, learned counsel for the respondent no.2, has placed before the Court a communication dated 26.11.2024 which reveals that in terms of the directions contained in the order dated 15.12.2023 passed in WP(C) No.4700/2019 the Review Medical Board was constituted and thereafter, the petitioner was reexamined and was again found to be unfit. 5. Under such circumstances, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submits that direction contained in the order dated 15.12.2023 passed in WP(C) Page No.# 3/4 No.4700/2019 has been complied with by the respondent Authorities and therefore, the contempt petition be closed. 6. Mr. R. Mazumder, learned counsel for the petitioner, while acknowledging the submissions of the learned counsel for respondent no. 2, concedes that the order has been duly complied with and the Review Medical Board was reconstituted, with the petitioner being reexamined. However, he points out, based on the copies of the documents which he is provided with it appears that although the Review Medical Board was indeed reconstituted and the petitioner was reexamined, the name of the specialist who conducted the examination is conspicuously absent from the records. He submits that since the directions of this Court required a specialist to be part of the Review Medical Board, this has not been done. 7. A careful perusal of the order dated 15.12.2023 reflects that the penultimate directions of the Court in the order dated 15.12.2023 passed in WP(C) No.4700/2019 was reconstitution reconstitute of a fresh Appeal Medical Board/ Review Medical Board within the period prescribed and that not having been done, this contempt petition at this stage can be closed as the directions have been complied with. However, if the petitioner is still aggrieved with the decision of the Review Medical Board, he is at liberty to take necessary steps Page No.# 4/4 before the appropriate forum. 8. In terms of the above, the contempt petition stands disposed of. 9. A copy of the communication dated 26.11.2024 be kept in the case record. JUDGE Comparing Assistant