Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010275962024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/225/2025 PULIN DIBRUWAL 1 NO. DOLAMURI, P.O.- DIBRU AMGURI, P.S.- NAHARKATIA, DIST.- DIBRUGARH- 786610, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS. REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 3:THE OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DIBRUGARH -786003 DIST.- DIBRUGARH ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR SISHIR DUTTA, MR S DUTTA,MS K BORAH,MS S MOCHAHARI,MR. S DUTTA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPT Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM ORDER Date : 27/01/2025 Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue and DM Department, Assam and Mr. D. Bora, learned Government Advocate, Assam, appearing for the official respondents. The writ petitioner herein, who was earlier appointed as Gram Pradhan, has approached this Court by filing the present petition assailing the order by means of which he has been removed from office. On the last occasion, this Court had directed the learned counsel for the respondents to obtain instruction as to whether any appellate remedy is available to the petitioner. Today, when the matter is called up, it is submitted at the Bar that under Rule 162-C of the Rules of Executive Instruction issued under the Assam Land and Revenue Regulations, there is a provision to prefer an appeal against the impugned order. Therefore, the petitioner has an alternative appellate remedy. At this stage, Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the period of limitation of 60 days for preferring the appeal in this case has already lapsed. Therefore, the same may create undue obstruction for the petitioner to seek Redressal of his grievance before the appellate forum. Responding to the above, the learned departmental counsel i.e. Mr. S. Dutta, SC, Revenue and DM Department and Mr. D. Bora, learned Government Advocate, Assam, have submitted that several appeals filed beyond the period of 60 days, have already been entertained by the Department and, therefore, if the petitioner succeeds in showing sufficient cause for condoning the delay, there is no Page No.# 3/3 reason as to why the delay would not be condoned in his case and the appeal be heard on merit. Taking note of the submission made at the Bar, this writ petition stands disposed of by providing that within 15 days from today, the petitioner shall be at liberty to prefer an appeal against the order of removal from office, if so advised. If such an appeal is preferred, along with a certified copy of this order as well as an application for condonation of delay, the same shall be considered by the appellate authority and disposed of by a reasoned order within 60(sixty) days from the date of receipt of the application. With the above observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Sukhamay Comparing Assistant