Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010186612014 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4591/2014 ASHOK DEB S/O LT. ARUN DEB VILL- NARAINCHERRA,PO. BORKHOLA DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIOER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, FINANCE BUDGET DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE BUDGET DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 3:THE DIRECTOR OF AUDIT LOCAL FUND ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 4:THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF AUDIT LOCAL FUND CACHAR CIRCLE RANGIRKHARI SILCHAR-5. 5:SHRI DURGA SWARGIARY S/OLT. SARAT SWARGIARY R/O VILL- BORIMURI P.O. CHARAIMURIA DIST.LAKHIMPUR. 6:SHRI ASHIM JYOTI BORAH Page No.# 2/5 S/O LT. PREMA NANDA BORAH VILL- KAMALPUR P.O. KAMALPUR CHARIALI DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.S K MEDHI, MR. B CHAKRABORTY,MR.J DAS,MR.A DAS Advocate for the Respondent : MR.B B NARZARI, MR.N BORAH,MR.D SAIKIA,MR.S CHAUHAN,SC, FINANCE,MR.B GOGOI Linked Case : MC/3108/2014 ASHOK DEB VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS ------------ Advocate for : MR.A DAS Advocate for : MR.B B NARZARI appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER 11/11/2025 Heard Mr. B Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R Borpujari, learned Standing counsel, Finance Department for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Also heard Mr. S Chauhan, learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 and Mr. N Bora, learned counsel for the respondent No. 6. 2. The petitioner, by way of instituting the present writ petition has assailed the orders dated 11.08.2014 and 19.08.2014 issued by the Director of Audit (Local Fund), Assam, Page No.# 3/5 cancelling the appointment effected in his case vide order dated 14.12.2012. 3. The brief facts requisite for adjudication of the issue arising in the present proceeding is noticed as under. The respondent No. 5, herein, had earlier approached this Court by way of instituting a writ petition being WP(C) No. 6119/2012, assailing the appointment effected in case of the respondent No. 6, herein and one another. The said writ petition was taken up for final consideration and a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 15.05.2014, proceeded to allow the said writ petition by directing for appointment of the respondent No. 5, herein, and for the purpose, it was also stipulated that it would be permissible to remove the last general candidate, who is the present petitioner. It was further stipulated in the order that in the event, it is necessitated to remove the present petitioner, he would have to be put on notice explaining the reasons necessitating deletion of his name from the select list and his consequential removal from service, to make way for appointment of the respondent No. 5, herein. In pursuance to the passing of the order dated 15.05.2014, the respondent authorities issued the order dated 11.08.2014 removing the name of the petitioner, herein, from the select list and thereafter, proceeded to issue an order dated 19.08.2014, cancelling the appointment effected in respect of the petitioner, herein, vide order dated 14.12.2012. Being aggrieved, the petitioner, herein, has instituted the present proceeding. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record. 5. This Court while issuing notices in the present petition vide order dated 10.09.2014, was pleased to suspend the impugned orders dated 11.08.2014 and 19.08.2014 and the said interim order continue to operate as on date. 6. Mr. R Borpujari, learned Standing counsel, Finance Department for the State respondent has placed before this Court a written instruction received by him, which reveals that the petitioner, herein, as well as the respondent No. 5 [petitioner in WP(C) No. Page No.# 4/5 6119/2012] are both continuing in their respective services. 7. It is to be noted that in pursuance to the direction passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 6119/2012, the respondent No. 5, herein, was appointed as Peon-cum-Chowkidar in the office of the Assistant Director of Audit (Local Fund), Tezpur Circle, Tezpur vide an order dated 26.03.2015. The petitioner, herein, who was initially appointed as Peon-cum-Chowkidar in the office of the Assistant Director of Audit (Local Fund) Silchar was allowed to continue to serve in the said establishment in pursuance to the interim order passed in the matter. The respondent No. 6, accordingly is also continued in his service without any hindrance whatsoever. 8. On perusal of the materials brought on record, this Court notices that while issuing the impugned orders dated 11.08.2014 and 19.08.2014, the petitioner was not put to notice although there was a clear stipulation in this connection made by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.05.2014 in WP(C) No. 6119/2014. 9. In view of the above position, the accommodation of the respondent No. 5 in terms of the direction passed by this Court vide order dated 15.05.2014 in WP(C) No. 6119/2012, apparently not requiring the removal of the petitioner, herein, and the appointment effected in respect of the respondent No. 5, being against a post other than the one held by the petitioner, herein, reflects that there were vacancies available for accommodating both the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 and accordingly, this Court at this distant point of time would not interfere with such arrangements made by the respondents in the matter. 10. In view of the above position, the impugned order dated 11.08.2014 and 19.08.2014 (Annexure-XIV and XV to the writ petition) stands set aside. 11. The petitioner as well as the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 shall be allowed to continue in their respective services in terms of their original orders of appointment. 12. The service of the petitioner, herein, shall not be disturbed in terms of the direction passed by this Court vide order dated 15.05.2014 in WP(C) No. 6119/2012. 13. With the above observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Page No.# 5/5 14. The instruction furnished by Mr. R Borpujari, learned Standing counsel, Finance Department is kept on record and marked as ‘X’ for the purpose of identification. JUDGE Comparing Assistant