Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010155502026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Review.Pet./118/2026 NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DESIGN, ASSAM REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, MS. DULUMONI KALITA, HAVING ITS ACADEMIC AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE AT TOCKLAI, RAJABARI, JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785014 VERSUS SOUMITRA NARAYAN ADHIKARY AND 4 ORS. S/O UDIT NARAYAN ADHIKARY, R/O H. NO. 17, SONALI PATH, BELTOLA, GUWAHATI- 28, KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM. PRESENTLY SERVING AS SENIOR ENGINEER (LAND, BUILDING AND MAINTENANCE), NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DESIGN, ASSAM 2:THE TEZPUR UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR NAPAAM TEZPUR ASSAM 3:THE VICE CHANCELLOR TEZPUR UNIVERSITY NAPAAM TEZPUR ASSAM 4:THE REGISTRAR (I/C) TEZPUR UNIVERSITY NAPAAM TEZPUR ASSAM 5:THE UNION OF INDIA Page No.# 2/5 REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA DEPARTMENT FOR PROMOTION OF INDUSTRY AND INTERNAL TRADE MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY UDYOG/VANIJYA BHAWAN 16 AKBAR ROAD NEW DELHI-11000 Advocate for the Petitioner : DR. A CHAMUAH, Advocate for the Respondent : MR H K DAS (R1), DY.S.G.I. (R5),MR N K SARMA (R1) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 27.07.2026 Heard Mr. D Saikia, Learned Senior Counsel assisted by Dr. A Chamuah, Learned Counsel for the Review Petitioner. Also heard Mr. H K Das, Learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. H Agarwal, Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents. This Review Petition has been instituted, praying for a review of the order dated 23.07.2026, passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 1730/2026. In the Review Petition, it has been projected that this Court, while passing its order on 23.07.2026, had noticed the submission of the Learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent No. 1, to grant him time till 27.07.2026, to file additional pleadings, to urge the ground of discrimination. In response, the Learned Senior Counsel for the Page No.# 3/5 Review Petitioner had submitted that as the matter was substantially heard, this Court would not allow any party to bring on record any further pleadings, which may cause serious prejudice to the interest of the other side. It is further projected that this Court, while dictating the order in the open Court, had affirmed that the objection raised by Mr. D Saikia, Learned Senior Counsel for the instant Review Petitioner, was recorded and the same was even read out by the Stenographer of this Court. However, it is projected that in the order dated 23.07.2026, the said portion of the order, wherein, the objections of Mr. D Saikia, Learned Senior Counsel for the instant Review Petitioner, and the acceptance of such objection by this Court, was omitted. Accordingly, it is submitted that the said order, being passed in the open Court, the said order could not have been changed. By making the said projections, the Review Petitioner has prayed for the following relief : “In the premises aforesaid, it is respectfully prayed to issue notice, admit this Petition, and upon hearing the parties, the order 23.07.2026 may kindly be reviewed, and the objection raised by the review Petitioner against the permission granted to the Writ Petitioner by this Court to bring new things on record on the day of final disposal, be included in the order dated 23.07.2026; and may pass such other order as may be deemed fit and proper.” Page No.# 4/5 On the said date of listing, this matter was being heard and initially, this Court was also reluctant to adjourn the matter, permitting the Learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent No. 1, herein, to bring on record any further pleadings. However, finally, when it was prayed by the Learned Senior Counsel for the instant Review Petitioner, that he would file a reply to the Additional affidavit filed by the instant Review Petitioner, the same was allowed and the earlier order was struck off, inasmuch as, by that time, the said order was not signed by this Court. The Petitioner, has today filed a reply in the matter. This Court today, in the connected Writ Petition, had noticed the said position and had enquired from the Learned Counsel for the Review Petitioner, as to the time they would require to file a response, thereto. The Learned Counsel appearing for the instant Review Petitioner, assisting Mr. D Saikia, Learned Senior Counsel, had submitted that such affidavit would be filed on 03.08.2026. The said position has been duly recorded by this Court, in the order passed today in the connected Writ Petition. Accordingly, an opportunity having been already granted to the Review Petitioners to file an affidavit in the connected Writ Petition, the non-incorporation of the objection of Page No.# 5/5 the Learned Senior Counsel, as made on 23.07.2026, in the order passed on that day, in the considered view of this Court, would not cause any prejudice to the Review Petitioners. Accordingly, the present Review Petition is not proceeded with and the same stands closed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant