Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010115162025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3005/2025 SRI LAKHAN CHAND SARKAR S/O- SURENDRA NATH SARKAR, VILL- BRAHMATTAR SHILAIRPAR, H. NO. 55, PS- GAURIPUR, DIST- DHUBRI VERSUS THE UNION OFINDIA AND ORS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI 110001 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF BORDER SECURITY FORCE BLOCK NO - 10 CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI PIN-110003 3:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL BORDER SECURITY FORCE BSP H.S SCHOOL BUILDING OPP. SBI MARODA-UTAI BR RISALI SECTOR (BHILAI) DIST- DURG CHATTISGARH 4:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL BORDER SECURITY FORCE BSP FTR HQ (SPL -OPS) BSFCG Page No.# 2/3 RISALI SECTOR (BHILAI) DIST- DURG CHATTISGARH-490006 5:THE COMMANDANT 47 BN BSF PAKHANJURE DIST- KANKER CHATTISGARH-49433 Advocate for the Petitioner : MD. S ISLAM, MR. M DEKA,MD S HOQUE Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM ORDER Date : 23-06-2025 Heard Mr. S. Hoque, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned CGC appearing on behalf of the respondents. The writ petitioner herein was serving as a Constable (GD) in the Border Security Force (BSF). By the order dated 12-01-2024, the writ petitioner was dismissed from service pursuant to a departmental proceeding initiated against him. Aggrieved by the impugned order of dismissal from service, the petitioner had preferred a statutory appeal before the concerned authority on 08-04-2024. However, the appeal has not been disposed of till date. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition. On 04-06-2025, this Court had passed an order directing the learned CGC to obtain instruction but apprise this Court as to the status of the appeal preferred by the petitioner. Page No.# 3/3 Today, when the matter is called up, Mr. Medhi, learned CGC submits that the appeal is still pending but the same is presently under consideration by the appellate authority. Therefore, he would have no objection, if the writ petition is dispose of at the stage of motion hearing with a direction upon the appellate authority to consider and dispose of the appeal in a time bound manner. Mr. Hoque, learned counsel for the writ petitioner is also agreeable to such an order. It is the admitted position of fact that the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending before the respondent No. 2, i.e. the Director General of BSF. In view of the nature of grievance expressed in the writ petition as well as the submission made at the Bar, this writ petition stands disposed of by providing that within 60 (sixty) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner be considered and disposed of on merit by a speaking order to be passed in accordance with law. If the writ petitioner continues to remain aggrieved even thereafter, it would be open for him to approach this Court once again by filing a fresh writ petition. With the above observation, this writ petition stands closed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant