Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 17080 (GAU)

SHAH ALAM BARBHUIYA v. SMTI SURANJANA SENAPATI

RCRev./455/2024 · 2025-02-20

Robin Phukan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010171872024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/455/2024 SHAH ALAM BARBHUIYA S/O - ALA UDDIN BARBHUIYA, R/O- VILL- KUCHILA, P.O. KUCHILA BAZAR, DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN- 788155. VERSUS SMTI SURANJANA SENAPATI THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION, ASSAM, KAHILIPARA, GUWAHATI-19. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR F U BARBHUIYA, MS S DAS Advocate for the Respondent : MR S M T CHISTIE, MR B KAUSHIK,MR. D SAIKIA BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 21.02.2025 Heard Mr. F.U. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. S.M.T. Chistie, learned counsel for the respondent/contemnor. During the course of hearing, Mr. Chistie has produced one order dated 19.11.2024 Page No.# 2/2 issued by the Director of Elementary Education, Assam, Kahilipara, Guwahati, and submits that the order of this Court dated 14.12.2023 has been complied with and as such, there is no willful disobedience or violation of the order of this Court and therefore, Mr. Chistie has contended to close this contempt case. Though Mr. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 19.11.2024 is the exact replica of the earlier order dated 18.02.2022, which was set aside by this Court yet, in this contempt proceeding this Court is not entitled to examine the merits and demerits of the order dated 19.11.2024 and as it appears that the order of this Court dated 14.12.2023 has been complied with, this Court is inclined to close this matter. However, liberty will remain with the petitioner to challenge the order dated 19.11.2024 in a writ proceeding, if so advised. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE