Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010112882015 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/53/2015 HAV. JEHIRUL ISLAM PRESENTLY WORKING UNDER 9TH A. P. BN., BARHAMPUR, DIST.- NAGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY., HOME DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY- 6. 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GHY- 7. 3:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ADMN. POLICE HEADQUARTER ULUBARI GHY- 7. 4:THE COMMANDANT 11TH A.P. BN. DERGAON DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM. 5:THE COMMANDANT 9TH A.P. BN. BARHAMPUR DIST.- NAGAON ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MD.A J ATIA, MRJ UDDIN,MS.F AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : , ,GA, ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 29.01.2025 Heard Ms. A. H. Atia, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. J. K. Goswami, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, appearing for the State Respondents. The challenge in the present proceeding is to an order dated 29.05.2008, by which, on conclusion of departmental proceeding instituted in the matter, the petitioner was imposed with the penalty of reversion to the rank of “Naik” from the rank of “Havildar”. Mr. J. K. Goswami, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, in terms of the directions passed by this Court, has today produced the original records of the departmental proceeding, so instituted against the petitioner, herein. On perusal of the said records it is revealed that the disciplinary authority had reviewed the order dated 29.05.2008 and on finding the petitioner to have rectified himself in his conduct, a fresh order dated 23.09.2008, reviewing the earlier order dated 29.05.2008, came to be issued. The petitioner in terms of the order dated 23.09.2008, has been now imposed with a penalty of withholding of two service increments with cumulative effect. By the said order dated 23.09.2008, the petitioner has been permitted to continue as an “ Havildar”. Page No.# 3/3 A perusal of the records further reveals that the petitioner was thereafter promoted to the rank of ABSI. The petitioner while serving as ABSI, had retired from his services on 31.08.2019. In view of the said developments Ms. Atia, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits that the challenge as presented in the present writ petition would not mandate a consideration in as much as the impugned order dated 29.05.2008, on review has been withdrawn. She accordingly submits that the present writ petition be dismissed as having become infructuous. Prayer is not objected to by the learned counsel for the respondents. In view of the above developments taking place in the matter, the writ petition stands dismissed as having become infructuous. JUDGE Comparing Assistant