Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010185242024 2025:GAU-AS:16249 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4650/2024 KISAN KUMAR SHARMA S/O- LATE CHOUTHMAL PRASAD SHARMA, R/O- CHOTA HAIBOR (NEAR CHOTA HOIBAR NAMGHAR, DIST- NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782003 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONNEL (A) DEPARTMENT, ASSAM SECRETARIAT (CIVIL), DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P KATAKI, MS S BARPUJARI,MS. A LALA,MRS R BEGUM Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER 28.11.2025 Heard Mr. P. Kataki, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. M. Bhattarcharjee, learned Addl. Sr. Government Advocate, Assam for the State respondents. Page No.# 2/3 2. The petitioner has put to challenge the initial suspension order dated 31.10.2022 and the subsequent extension orders. 3. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner has been under suspension for a long period of time and despite the disciplinary proceeding having been initiated on 03.04.2023, the same has not been concluded till date. 4. Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the State respondents has submitted letter No.AAP.62/2024/96 dated 28.11.2025, issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, Personnel (A) Department, which states that the enquiry report in respect of the departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioner, has been submitted by the Enquiry Officer vide letter No. C&S/IO/DP/KKS/24-25/13 dated 18.11.2025 and is under examination in the department. 5. On considering the submissions made by the counsels for the parties and keeping in view the fact that the enquiry report has been furnished by the Enquiry Officer, the respondents are directed to ensure that the enquiry report is furnished to the petitioner for eliciting his representation against the same, within a period of 2(two) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After the petitioner makes his representation against the same, if submitted, within the time schedule permitted by the Disciplinary Authority, the final decision on the Departmental Proceeding should be taken by the Disciplinary Authority, within a further period of 1(one) month. 6. In view of the above facts, this Court is not inclined to pass any order with Page No.# 3/3 regard to the suspension of the petitioner. The issue as to whether the petitioner is entitled to payment of past benefits, would be determined on the basis of the outcome of the departmental proceeding. 7. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant