Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010148712025 2025:GAU-AS:9451 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3967/2025 NAZRUL HAQUE CHOUDHURY S/O LATE MANTAZIR ALI CHOUDHURY, R/O BERENGA PART-II, PIN-788005, P.O.- BERENGA, P.S.- SILCHAR, DIST- CACHAR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE L.R. AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM 2:THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 ASSAM 3:THE REGISTRAR GENERAL GAUHATI HIGH COURT GUWAHATI-01 KAMRUP (M) ASSAM 4:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 ASSAM 5:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL (B) Page No.# 2/3 DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 KAMRUP (M) ASSAM 6:THE DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE CACHAR AT SILCHAR SILCHAR-788001 CACHAR ASSAM 7:THE MEMBER MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL CACHAR AT SILCHAR SILCHAR-788001 CACHAR ASSA For the petitioner (s) : Ms. S. G. Baruah, Advocate For the respondent (s) : Mr. H. K. Das, SC, GHC Ms. U. Das, Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate Mr. A. Chaliha, SC, Finance BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH O R D E R 23.07.2025 Heard Ms. S. G. Baruah, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Ms. U. Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.1, 2 & 5; Mr. H. K. Das, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.3, 6 & 7 and Mr. A Chaliha, the Page No.# 3/3 learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No.4. 2. The petitioner herein who was working in the capacity of a driver in the establishment of the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Silchar has filed the instant writ petition seeking regularization to the post wherein the petitioner has been discharging his function for the last 13 years. 3. It has been brought to the attention of this Court by Mr. H. K. Das, the learned Standing Counsel of the Gauhati High Court that in pursuance to a proper selection process initiated, a person has been duly selected and he has been appointed against the vacant post. 4. Taking into account that a person has been duly selected and appointed to the vacant post, the question of regularization of the petitioner against the said post does not arise without a challenge to the person’s selection and appointment. 5. Considering the said, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for exercising the writ jurisdiction in the matter of which the instant writ petition stands dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant