Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26412 (GAU)

TUN TUN BORAH v. ANANDA KUMAR DAS

Cont.Cas(C)/784/2023 · 2025-10-28

Soumitra Saikia

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010263972023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/784/2023 TUN TUN BORAH D/O- LATE BIREN BORA, R/O- KRISHNA ELITES, 5C, NIZARAPATH, GANESH TURNING, KAHILIPARA ROAD, P.O. GANESH TURNING, P.S. BHAGADATTAPUR, DIST. KAMRUP(M), PIN- 781019. VERSUS ANANDA KUMAR DAS THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR, FOOD, CIVIL SUPPLIES CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND LEGAL METROLOGY, R.K. MISSION ROAD, P.O. ULUBARI, DIST. KAMRUP(M), ASSAM, PIN- 781007. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K M MAHANTA, MS N BEGUM,MR S GAUTAM Advocate for the Respondent : MR. D NATH, MS. N BARMAN BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 29.10.2025 This Court vide order dated 04.01.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 7730/2022 had disposed of the writ petition with the following directions: “8. In the instant case, the said principle of law cannot be said to have been followed inasmuch as, the adverse remarks were acted upon at a prior date and the adverse ACRs were communicated subsequently. In view of the above, we Page No.# 2/2 require the petitioner to submit her representation against the adverse ACRs communicated by the communication dated 13.07.2021 and after such representation is submitted, the respondent authorities to consider such representation and pass a reasoned order. Upon such reasoned order being passed, the claim of the petitioner for promotion be placed before a review selection committee / DPC in the same terms as the earlier selection committee which was held on 08.07.2021. The entire process be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 9. The minutes of the DPC dated 08.07.2021 and the communication dated 13.07.2021 are kept on record. The writ petition is disposed of as indicated above” Since this order was not complied with, the writ petitioner has filed this contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience of the directions contained in this order. Notices in the contempt petition were issued. Thereafter, during the pendency of the contempt petition, the petitioner’s case was considered and she was temporarily promoted to the post of Accountant, Office of the Commissionerate of Food, Public Distribution, Consumer Affairs and Legal Metrology, Assam, Ulubari. In pursuance of the Minutes of the Reviewing “Selection Committee” meeting held on 17.07.2025, the order of promotion was also issued on 17.07.2025. Copy of the said order has been placed before this Court by the learned counsel representing the respondents. Upon perusal of the said order and taking into the consideration the submissions made, this Court is of the view that the directions contained in the order dated 04.01.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 7730/2022 stood complied with. Therefore, the contempt petition stands closed. Notice issued earlier, stands recalled. JUDGE Comparing Assistant