Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010254592024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6455/2024 ASHOK KR MANDAL SON OF SRI RAM CHANDRA MANDAL, R/O- RABIRAM TOLA COLONY, 17 MILE, P.O.- DAMODAR TOLA, P.S.- KALIACHAK, DIST.- MALDAH, WEST BENGAL, PIN- 732207. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, CABINET SECRETARIAT, RAISINA HILL, NEW DELHI- 110001, INDIA. 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL BORDER SECURITY FORCE BLOCK NO. 10 CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI PIN- 110003. 3:THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL HQR SPL DG BSF (EC) KOLKATA WEST BENGAL KOLKATA- 700062. Page No.# 2/5 4:THE CHIEF LAW OFFICER LAW DTE FHQ BSF BLOCK NO. 10 CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI- 110003. 5:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL FRONTIER HEADQUARTER BORDER SECURITY FORCE GUWAHATI ASSAM GUWAHATI- 781131. 6:THE COMMANDANT 38TH BATTALION BORDER SECURITY FORCE SAKAWRTUICHHUN DIST.- AIZAWL MIZORAM PIN- 796009. 7:THE SECOND-IN-COMMAND (2IC) 38TH BATTALION BORDER SECURITY FORCE SAKAWRTUICHHUN DIST.- AIZAWL MIZORAM PIN- 796009. 8:THE COMMANDANT HQ. M AND C FT BSF 170 BN BSF DHOLCHERA CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 788127 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M SARANIA, N GOGOI,MR A SARANIA,MR. P P GOGOI Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. D C BORAH (C.G.C) Page No.# 3/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 21.03.2025 Heard Mr. M. Sarania, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. KM Hassan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. DC Borah, learned CGC for the respondents. 2. The writ petitioner is before this Court with a limited prayer. The petitioner was a Constable (GD) (No.148015405) of Border Security Force (BSF). Pursuant to a proceeding initiated under the General Security Force Court (GSFC) in Bn HQ 170 Bn BSF, Dholchera, Cachar, the petitioner was dismissed from service with 4 (four) years imprisonment. Presently, the petitioner is undergoing the punishment imposed by the GSF Court. Against the impugned order dated 30.07.2023 passed by the BSF, the petitioner had filed an appeal before the Deputy Inspector General (CLO), FHQ, Border Security Force, Block No.10, CGO Complex, Lodhi Raod, New Delhi. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that an appeal is a statutory appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 117 (2) of the Border Security Force Act, 1968. It is submitted that the said appeal has remained pending and no order has been passed till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that before filing the appeal, Page No.# 4/5 the petitioner had also filed a representation dated 09.09.2024 before the said authority requesting for certain documents so that these may be relied upon by the petitioner while filing the appeal. This representation has also remained pending and the documents as sought for by the petitioner have not been furnished to him as per the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Nevertheless, the petitioner preferred the statutory appeal and the same is presently pending before the Appellate Authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays before the Court that the direction be issued to the respondent Authorities to dispose of the appeal and the order that may have been passed by the appellate authority, a copy thereof be served to the petitioner and further, the documents he had sought for by representation dated 09.09.2024 also be furnished to him. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not object to the prayer made. 4. Accordingly, this writ petition stands closed directing the Appellate Authority, namely, the Deputy Inspector General (CLO), FHQ, Border Security Force, who is also the Chief law Officer, namely, the respondent no.4 to dispose of the statutory appeal filed by the petitioner by issuing a speaking order and thereafter, serve a copy of the same to the writ petitioner. It is made clear that if the appeal has already been disposed of in the meantime, a copy of the said Page No.# 5/5 order be furnished to the writ petitioner. The prayer made by the petitioner by his representation dated 09.09.2024, seeking certain documents, may also be considered to furnish him and if these documents can be furnished to the petitioner, the same may be furnished without any further delay. 5. The directions of this Court be carried out within a period of 4 (four) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 6. The writ petition stands allowed in terms of the above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant