Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 2483 (GAU)

FUL JAN NESSA v. SMTI. MAMATA HOJAI, AES AND ANR

Cont.Cas(C)/553/2025 · 2026-02-17

N Unni Krishnan Nair

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010230822025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/553/2025 FUL JAN NESSA 1ST WIFE OF LATE ABDUL HAMID SHEIKH, R/O VILL- DAMRIBHASA, P.O.- KATARIHARA, P.S.-LAKHIPUR, DIST- GOALPARA, ASSAM VERSUS SMTI. MAMATA HOJAI, AES AND ANR THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, ASSAM, KAHILIPARA, GUWAHATI-19, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM 2:BHABESH DEKA AFS THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 KAMRUP (M) ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A RAHMAN, Advocate for the Respondent : MR S M T CHISTIE(R1), MR. U SARMA(R1) Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER 18/02/2026 Heard Mr. A Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. U Sarma, learned counsel, representing the respondents. Mr. U Sarma, learned counsel, representing the respondents, on instructions, has submitted that in pursuance to the directions passed by this Court vide order dated 13.06.2024 in WP(C) No. 7285/2023, a hearing was held, wherein, the petitioner, who is the 1st wife of Late Abdul Hamid Sheikh, retired Assistant Teacher of Katarihara High School and his 2nd wife, Ashia Khatun were present and the hearing was concluded. It is submitted that on completion of the hearing in terms of the agreement arrived at between the 1st wife and the 2nd wife for sharing the family pension between themselves, the Director of Secondary Education, Assam has already directed the Inspector of Schools to forward a proposal in this connection to the Director of Pension, Assam, who is the pension sanctioning authority. In view of the above position, the directions passed by this Court vide order dated 13.06.2024 is found to have been complied with. There being no violation of the directions passed by this Court highlighted in the matter, this Court is of the considered view that the present contempt petition need not be kept pending further. Page No.# 3/3 Accordingly, in view of the compliance, as noticed hereinabove, the present contempt petition stands closed. A copy of the instructions furnished by Mr. U Sarma, learned counsel, representing the respondents, is kept on record and marked as ‘X’. JUDGE Comparing Assistant