KHANINDRA SUKLABAIDYA v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
WP(C)/5959/2024 · 2025-04-02
Nelson Sailo
Writ Petition (Civil)body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 20650 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 20650 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010236542024
2025:GAU-AS:3950
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5959/2024 KHANINDRA SUKLABAIDYA S/O- LATE KRISHNA MOHAN SUKLABAIDYA, R/O- DOLOICHUNGA, AGRICULTURE SEED FARM, P.O./P.S.- HARANGAJAO, DISTRICT- DIMA HASAO, ASSAM, PIN- 788818 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6, DIST.- KAMRUP, ASSAM 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 ASSAM 3:THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE KHANAPARA GUWAHATI-22 DISTRICT- KAMRUP ASSAM 4:THE JOINT. DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DIMA HASAO HALFLONG DISTRICT- DIMA HASAO ASSAM 5:THE DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL OFFICER DIMA HASAO HALFLONG DISTRICT- DIMA HASAO
Page No.# 2/2 ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS N SAIKIA, MRS. P GOSWAMI Advocate for the Respondent : SC, AGRI. DEPARTMENT, SC, DIMA HASAO,SC, FINANCE DEPTT.
BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER 03.04.2025 Ms R Deka, learned counsel for Dima Hasao Autonomous Counsel, submits that the petitioner earlier had filed WP(C) No. 5978/2015, by which he prayed for regularization of his service and for granting him pensionary benefits. However, the writ petition was rejected by this Court, vide order dated 26.07.2017, and therefore, the instant writ petition, on the same prayer is not maintainable.
2. Ms G Bora, learned counsel appears for respondent Nos. 1 and 3, and she agrees with the submission.
3. At this stage, Ms N Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she may be allowed to withdraw the writ petition.
4. In view of above, this writ petition stands dismissed on withdrawal.
5. It is, however observed herein, that if there is a separate cause of action not covered by the earlier decision of this Court, petitioner may take recourse to the remedy as may be available in law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant