Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010194112025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Review.Pet./239/2025 DILBAR ALI S/O NABJESH ALI, VILL. AND P.O. RADHAKUCHI, P.S. BARPETA, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 06 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BARPETA ASSAM PIN 781301 3:KISMAT ALI S/O HABIBAR RAHMAN R/O VILL. RADHAKUCHI P.S. BARPETA DIST. BARPETA ASSAM PIN 78130 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R ALI, MR M SHELIM Advocate for the Respondent : MR. J HANDIQUE, SC, REVENUE DEPTT., MR. C K S BARUAH, GA, ASSAM Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 17.11.2025 Heard Mr. R Ali, learned counsel for the review petitioner. Also heard Mr. D Barman, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 and Mr. S Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department. 2. This review petition was directed against the order dated 11.04.2023 passed in W.P.(C) No. 625/2023. The writ petition was filed by the private respondent in the present review petition challenging the selection and appointment of the review petitioner as Gaon Pradhan of Charge No. 14, Mouza- Nagaon, Barpeta Revenue Circle, District Barpeta in view of the submission of the learned State counsel before the Coordinate Bench that there is a provision for an appeal as per Executive Instructions No. 162(c), the writ petition came to be disposed of directing the petitioner in W.P(C) No. 625/2023 to prefer an appeal within seven days and if such an appeal is preferred, the same was directed to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible but not later than 60 days. The Co-ordinate Bench further directed that till the appeal is disposed of, the interim order dated 08.02.2023, which was passed in the writ petition, will continue to hold the field. 3 By order dated 08.02.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 625/2023, the Co- ordinate Bench, while permitting the learned counsel for Revenue and Disaster Management to complete instructions directed that no order of appointment was to be issued to the private respondent named therein namely the present review petitioner without proper verification by the competent authorities as regards his eligibility to participate in the selection process. Page No.# 3/5 4. The present review petition now has been filed seeking review of the directions contained in the order dated 11.04.2023, passed in WPC 625/2023 to the extent that the interim order passed on 08.02.2023 in the said writ petition will continue till disposal of the appeal as till date the appeal has not been disposed of and the review petitioner, although duly selected, has not been permitted to join in his office by virtue of the interim order. 5. On earlier occasions, liberty was granted to the respondent counsel to complete their instructions. 6. The State counsel appearing for the Revenue Department has informed the Court today that the appeal is in the process of being heard and the next date fixed is 04.12.2025. 7. The learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Private Respondent No. 3 in the Review Petition, Mr. D. Barman is also present in court. 8. There is no dispute that by the order seeking review, namely order dated 11.04.2023, passed in W.P(C) No. 625/2023, the interim order passed earlier was directed to continue till disposal of the appeal and the appeal, which was permitted to be filed by the Court by the Writ Petitioner within 7 days from the date of the order, if so filed, was further directed to be disposed of within a period of 60 days by the authorities and it is only till that time the interim order was required to continue. 9. However, notwithstanding the order, the Writ Petition being closed by the order dated 11.04.2023 and the appeal being filed thereafter within 7 days, the appeal has not been disposed of and the interim order, in the meantime, has also continued by virtue of the Court's order and as a consequence thereof, the Writ Petitioner although selected and his selection having not been interfered Page No.# 4/5 with by the appellate forum till date, has not been permitted to join in his post. 10. Considering the submissions made and also the orders dated 08.02.2023 and 11.04.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 625/2023, this Court is of the view that the interim protection granted by the Writ Court was to have continued till the disposal of the appeal preferred by the private respondent in the present review petition. The Court specifically directed the appeal be disposed of expeditiously but not later than 60 days and until such time the appeal was disposed of, it was directed that the interim order will hold field till then. However, the Respondent Department, for reasons best known, have not been able to dispose of the appeal as directed within 60 days from the date of the order dated 11.04.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 625/2023 and as a consequence thereof, the interim order is still in operation whereby the writ petitioner has been precluded from being appointed in his post for which he was selected, notwithstanding that the appointment of the writ petitioner has not yet been interfered with by any appropriate orders. 11. Under such circumstances, this Court considers it appropriate to allow the review petition by modifying the order passed on 11.04.2023 in WP(C) No. 625/2023 to the extent that since the appeal as directed could not be disposed of within 60 days, the currency of the interim order dated 08.02.2023 will cease to operate. 12. With the above observation, the review petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Page No.# 5/5 Comparing Assistant