Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010004732025 2025:GAU-AS:1171 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/441/2025 AKASH KUMAR S/O- SRI SURESH KUMAR, R/O- VILLAGE- RAJA BAZAR, JAIPUR, JAIPUR PART-I, P.O. AND P.S. JAIPUR, DISTRICT- CACHAR, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GRIHA MANTRALAYA, NEW DELHI 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL THE CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE LODHI ROAD 13 CGOS COMPLEX NEW DELHI- 110003 3:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL THE CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE PERS BLOCK NO. 13 CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI- 110003 4:THE COMMANDANT CISF UNIT IGI AIRPORT NEW DELHI P.O. PALAM AIRPORT Page No.# 2/4 NEW DELHI- 110037 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CACHAR SILCHAR DISTRICT- CACHAR ASSAM PIN CODE 788001 6:THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE CACHAR SILCHAR DISTRICT- CACHAR ASSAM PIN CODE 78800 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R MAJUMDAR, MR. JUNM LASKAR,MS. J GHOSH Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., GA, ASSAM BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY O R D E R 05.02.2025 1. Heard Mr. R Majumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. J Sarmah, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1,2,3 and 4 and Mr. D Borah, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 5 and 6. 2. As agreed to by the learned counsels for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed at the motion stage itself taking note of the limited prayer. 3. The petitioner, who was appointed as Constable (GD) in CISF by an appointment letter dated 11.11.2022 was terminated from service prior to completion of the probationary period of 2 years on 04.10.2024 on the ground that during the selection process he had wrongly declared to be Page No.# 3/4 Domicile of Cachar district. Such determination was made on the basis of an enquiry report submitted by the Additional District Magistrate, Cachar and according to the petitioner such report was prepared behind his back as well as such report has no base and the petitioner is a permanent resident of the village which he has declared and he is also having landed property there. 4. In the aforesaid backdrop, the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the Inspector General, CISF on 11.11.2024 under Rule 26(1) of the CISF Rules, 2001. Such appeal is still pending and one of the grievance of the petitioner is that such appeal has not yet been decided and the petitioner has also not been heard. 5. In the aforesaid backdrop, the learned counsel representing the CISF submits that the appellate authority will definitely consider the appeal of the petitioner and pass independent order applying its own mind. 6. In view of the aforesaid submission, in the considered opinion of this court, the matter should be relegated at this stage to the Inspector General, CISF to decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of directing the Inspector General, CISF to take on record the appeal preferred by the petitioner under Rule 26(1) of the CISF Rules, 2001 and pass a reasoned order taking note of the grievances raised by the petitioner. 8. It is provided that the petitioner may file an additional application along with the order passed today in the present writ petition. 9. The aforesaid appeal be disposed of within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order to be submitted by the petitioner before the Inspector General, CISF. Page No.# 4/4 10. This disposes the writ petition. JUDGE Comparing Assistant