MONESWAR BORO AND 15 ORS v. KAILASH CHAND SAMARIA AND 2 ORS.
Cont.Cas(C)/677/2025 · 2026-05-10
Soumitra Saikia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 3297 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 3297 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010281042025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/677/2025 MONESWAR BORO AND 15 ORS S/O- LATE RABI RAM BORO, VILL- OUGURI, P.O- MAHARIPARA, P.S- GORESWAR, DISTRICT- TAMULPUR, PIN- 781364, ASSAM. 2: CHAKRADHAR DAS S/O LATE BIPAN CHANDRA DAS
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NIZKACHULA. PO MAHARIPARA PO GORESWAR DIST TAMULPUR ASSAM 781364 3: SRI GOBINDA RABHA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND PO CHENIGAON PS GORESWAR DIST TAMULPUR ASSAM 781366 4: SRI GOPAL DEKA S/O LATE RANTI RAM DEKA
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BETAGAON PO NAOKATA NATAKATA PS GORESWAR DIST TAMULPUR ASSAM 781364 5: SRI SIVA RAM KALITA S/O LATE ADITYA KALITA
Page No.# 2/6 RESIDENT OF VILLAGE TENGAJHAR PO TENGAJHAR PS GORESWAR DIST BAKSA ASSAM 781364 6: SRI NAREN RABHA S/O CHANDRA RABHA
RESIDENT OF BARIGAON PO CHENIGAON PS GORESWAR DIST TAMULPUR ASSAM 781364 7: ANIL DAS S/O SRI MOHANBASTI DAS
RESIDENT OF BARIGAON PO CHENIGAON PS GORESWAR DIST TAMULPUR ASSAM 781364 8: SRI BULARAM BORO S/O LATE NALIN CH. BORO
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RAMCHAJHAR PO MAHARIPARA PS GORESWAR DIST TAMULPUR ASSAM 781364 9: SRI INDIRA DEKA S/O UPENDRA DEKA
RESIDENT OF RANGMAHAL PO KERPABITHA PS GORESWAR DIST TAMULPUR ASSAM 781366 10: SRI BRIHOSPATI BORO S/O LATE TEPA BORO
RESIDENT F VILLAGE 3 NO. GORESWAR PO AND PS GORESWAR
Page No.# 3/6 DIST TAMULPUR ASSAM 781366 11: MEDHI RAM BORO S/O LATE CHANDRADHAR BORO RESIDENT OF OUGURI PO BHOGPUR PS GORESWAR DIST TAMULPUR ASSAM 781366 12: SRI MIRA BASUMATARY W/O BIKASH BORO
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BENTA RAJAKHAT PO BENTA PS GORESWAR DIST TAMULPUR ASSAM 781364 13: SRI DHIREN RABHA S/O CHANDRA KANTA RABHA
RESIDENT OF BARIGAON PO CHENIGAON PS GORESWAR DIST TAMULPUR ASSAM 781364 14: NAGEN BORO S/O ANIL BORO RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND PO TENGAJHAR PS GORESWAR DIST TAMULPUR ASSAM 781364 15: DIPEN BORO S/O LATE MONO RAM BORO
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NIZ BORIGOG PO AND PS GHOGRAPAR DIST NALBARI ASSAM 781396 16: SASTI RAM BORO S/O KANTA RAM BORO
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BENTA OUGURI PO MAHARIPARA PS GORESWAR DIST TAMULPUR
Page No.# 4/6 ASSAM 78136 VERSUS KAILASH CHAND SAMARIA AND 2 ORS. THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6 2:DHRUBAJYOTI RAY CHOUDHURY THE CHIEF ENGINEER DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWHAATI-03 DIST- KAMRUP (M) 3:LATIKANTA KUMBANG THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER TEZPUR CIRCLE (IRRIGATION) DIST- TEZPUR ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.
B K DAS, K. KALITA Advocate for the Respondent : MR. N UPADHAYAY, MS. D S NEOG (R1)
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
ORDER 11.05
.2026 Heard Mr. K. Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. D.S. Neog, learned counsel for the respondent No.1.
2. Ms. D.S. Neog, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has placed before the Court a speaking order dated 11.05.2026, whereby the prayer and the claim of the writ petitioner namely Sri. Moneswar Boro and 15 Ors. stood rejected.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that the directions contained in the order dated 19.02.2025 passed in WP(C) No.
Page No.# 5/6 839/2025 have been complied with therefore, the contempt petition be closed.
4. The order dated 19.02.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 839/2025 has been carefully perused. By the said order the following directions have been issued:
“7. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that similar reliefs are sought for in the present case and since the petitioners are also Muster Roll workers, the writ petition can be closed directing the concerned respondents to carry out the directions in terms of the
Judgment & Order passed in the case of Sri Upen Das (supra).
8. It is however made clear that before any orders are passed in terms of the directions contained in Sri Upen Das (supra), the respondent authorities are entitled to carry out a proper verification to find out if the petitioners are still entitled to the claim as prayed for.
9. In the event, if they are entitled, the benefits be conferred in terms of the aforesaid directions contained in Sri Upen Das (supra).
10. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of, in terms of the above.”
5. It is clear from the order extracted above, that the directions were issued to the respondent authorities to examine the claims of the writ petitioners as to their entitlement of similar benefits as conferred in terms of the directions passed in the case of State of Assam Vs. Sri Upen Das, reported in (2017) 4 GLR 493.
6. By the speaking order dated 11.05.2026, it is seen that the authorities have considered the cases of the petitioners and on the basis of the reports submitted by the Superintending Engineer, Tezpur Circle (Irrigation) the claims of the petitioners were duly examined and it was found that the claims of the petitioners could not be entertained due to the absence of any supporting official records by establishing their engagement as Muster Roll Workers under the Irrigation Department.
7. A copy of the speaking order dated 11.05.2026, which is furnished by the
Page No.# 6/6
learned counsel for the respondents is kept as a part of the case record.
8. In view of the speaking order dated 11.05.2026, this Court is of the considered view that the directions issued in the order dated 19.02.2025 passed in WP(C) No.839/2025 have been complied with as the Co-ordinate Bench had issued directions to examine the cases of the petitioners, as to whether they are found to be entitled to be conferred the benefits in terms of the order of the Upen Das (supra). In the said order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench, there was no finding on merit insofar as the claims of the writ petitioners are concerned. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that no contempt case is made out against the respondents, therefore, the contempt petition stands closed.
9. Notices issued, if any, stand recalled.
10. The petitioners however, are entitled to assail the speaking order dated 11.05.2026 by any appropriate proceedings if their grievances subsists.
11. Accordingly, this contempt petition stands closed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant