Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010035262025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1108/2025 G 5002134M EX RFN GD SATISH KUMAR 18TH ASSAM RIFLES C/O 99 APO, DISMISSED FROM SERVICE FROM ASSAM RIFLES TRAINING CENTRE AND SCHOOL, C/O 99 APO VERSUS UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-01 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF ASSAM RIFLES SHILLONG MEGHALAYA-11 3:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL ASSAM RIFLES TRAINING CENTRE AND SCHOOL C/O 99 APO PIN 900300 4:THE COMMANDANT 18TH ASSAM RIFLES C/O 99APO PIN 93201 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR V KUMAR, MR. T NATH,MR B PATHAK,MS M TIWARI Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MS. B SARMA (C.G.C) Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 10.09.2025 Heard Mr. B Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. B Sarma, learned CGC. 2] The petitioner has assailed the order of dismissal dated 01.10.2024 passed by the respondent no.3 dismissing the writ petitioner from service from the Assam Rifles. Against the order of dismissal as per Section 139 of the Assam Rifles Act, 2006, the petitioner preferred an appeal on 02.12.2024. Although the writ petitioner has filed this writ petition to set aside the dismissal order dated 01.10.2024, however, no order has been passed by the Appellate Authority in the appeal filed by the petitioner. 3] This Court by order dated 26.08.2025 had granted time to the learned CGC to obtain instructions as to whether the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been disposed of. Learned CGC submits that although she has sought for instructions but the same is still awaited. 4] Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that notwithstanding the dismissal order being assailed in the present writ petition and the petitioner is seeking to set aside the dismissal order, a direction may be given to the respondent No. 2 to consider the appeal dated 02.12.2024 (Annexure-5). Accordingly, it is submitted that since no instructions are forthcoming from the respondents, the writ petition can be closed with a direction to the respondent no.2 to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner on 02.12.2024, if not disposed of in the meantime. 5] Considering the limited prayer made by the petitioner and which is not Page No.# 3/3 objected to by the learned CGC for the respondents, this Court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of at this stage without expressing anything on merit of the case. Accordingly, the respondent no.2 will ensure that the appeal preferred by the petitioner on 02.12.2024 is disposed of as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 60 (sixty) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. If during the pendency of the writ petition, the appeal preferred by the petitioner has already been disposed of, then a copy thereof shall be served on the writ petitioner. 6] With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Interim order, if any, stands merged. Pending Interlocutory Application, if any, stands closed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant