REKHA KALITA AND ORS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS
I.A.(Civil)/1567/2025 · 2025-05-25
Nelson Sailo
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 12497 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 12497 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010104162025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1567/2025 REKHA KALITA AND ORS ASSISTANT TEACHER, ANCHALIK H.S. SCHOOL, MERKUCHI W/O DHARANIDHAR KALITA VILL- GELPEJAR, P.O. MERKUCHI DISTRICT- BAKSA, ASSAM, PIN-781346 2: BABITA NATH ASSISTANT TEACHER
ANCHALI H.S. SCHOOL
MERKUCHI
W/O RAJIB BRAHMA VILL- DONGPAR P.O. JALAHGHAT DIST. BAKSA ASSAM
PIN-781327 3: PUTULI DAS ASSISTANT TEACHER
NAMATI MOUZA HIGH SCHOOL
W/O RABIN JIT MEDHI VILL AND P.. NIZ NAMATI DIST. BAKSA ASSAM
PIN-78135 VERSUS
Page No.# 2/4 THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, EDUCATION (SECONDARY) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006 2:THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION BODOLAND TERRITORIAL AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL
KOKRAJHAR PIN-788819
DIST. KOKRAJHAR ASSAM 3:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS BAKSA DISTRICT CIRCLE
MUSHALPUR DIST. BAKSA ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S Ali, MR K DAS,MD S HUSSAIN,MRS. P B HAZARIKA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU., SC, BTC
B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO
ORDER 26.05.2025 Heard Mr. S Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner who submits that by filing this application, the petitioner seeks the correction of certain clerical mistakes appearing in the Order dated 21.03.2025. The learned counsel submits that in the said order, Smt. Rekha Kalita has been shown as “D/o Dharanidhar
Page No.# 3/4 Kalita”. In fact, it should be “W/o Dharanidhar Kalita”. Secondly, the name of the School has been wrongly shown as “Anchalik H.S School, Merkuchi” in respect of the petitioner No. 2. He submits that instead of “Merkuchi” it should be “Anchali H.S School, Anchali”. Thirdly, the learned counsel submits that name of petitioner No. 3 has been wrongly shown as “Putali Das”. The correct name is
“Putuli Das”. Mr. P Hazarika, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. S R Rabha,
learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 & 3 submits that he has no objection if the correction to the typographical mistakes is made. In view of above, the correction as sought for the application is hereby allowed. In other words, Rekha Kalita will be shown as “W/o Dharanidhar Kalita” and the School in which the respondent No. 2 is working will be read as “Anchali H.S School, Anchali” and the name of petitioner No. 3 will be read as “Putuli Das”. I.A stands disposed of as allowed. JUDGE
Page No.# 4/4 Comparing Assistant