Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 16385 (GAU)

NITU MECH v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.

WP(C)/4358/2023 · 2025-03-17

Kardak Ete

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010161362023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4358/2023 NITU MECH S/O- LATE PUTUL MECH, R/O- NEW KALIBARI, MAITHAN ROAD, P.O. AND P.S.- TEZPUR, DISTRICT- SONITPUR, ASSAM, PIN- 784001. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006. 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006. 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006. 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SONITPUR P.O.- TEZPUR DISTRICT- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S C BISWAS, MS. U NANDA,MS A BORAH,MS. J Page No.# 2/3 GHOSH,MR. P S BISWAS Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, FINANCE,SC, REVENUE BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE O R D E R Date : 18.03.2025. Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioner. And also heard Ms. U. Sarma, learned State Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 4, Mr. J. Handique, learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue Department/respondent No.2 and Mr. R. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel for the Finance Department/respondent No.3. After arguing the matter at some length, having realized that the recommendation of the State Level Selection Committee as well as the appointment order of the petitioner in the Grade-IV post on compassionate ground is subject to the concurrence of Finance Department, which has not been obtained by the appointing authority, as required, Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel submits that he may be allowed to withdraw the writ petition with a liberty to file fresh petition praying appropriate relief as the present petition pertains only for payment of arrear and current salary of the petitioner. The learned counsels for the respondents have no objection in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and also considering that the appointment of the petitioner as a Grade-IV Page No.# 3/3 employee on compassionate ground appears to have been made without obtaining the concurrence of the Finance Department, as required to have been done, the prayer for withdrawal of the writ petition is allowed. Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed on withdrawal with a liberty to file afresh, seeking appropriate relief. JUDGE Comparing Assistant