Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010195142026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5120/2026 VISHAL KUNDARA EX-JUNIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA R/O JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN- 302015. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110001. 2:DIRECTOR GENERAL NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU HEADQUARTERS AUGUST KRANTI BHAWAN BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE NEW DELHI - 110066. 3:ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU CHENNAI ZONAL UNIT TNHB COMPLEX AYYAPAKKAM CHENNAI TAMIL NADU - 600077. 4:ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU GUWAHATI ZONAL UNIT DC OFFICE ROAD AMINGAON KAMRUP RURAL Page No.# 2/3 ASSAM - 781031 Advocate for the Petitioner : AMAN ALI, DOLY DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, NCB, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR ORDER 28.09.2026 (M. Zothankhuma, J) 1. Heard Ms. D. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R.K.D. Choudhury, learned Sr. Counsel and Dy. S.G.I appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner's case is that a challenge had been made to the termination of the service of the petitioner before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, in O.A No. 131/2026. However, one day prior to the final hearing of the case on 20.08.2026, the respondents had produced a voluminous set of materials on 19.08.2026, which had a bearing on the reasons for termination of the petitioner from service. However, the petitioner was not given any opportunity to make any representation against the voluminous set of materials brought out by the respondents on 19.08.2026. Nevertheless, the learned Tribunal, vide order dated 20.08.2026 gave liberty to the parties to file their written arguments, within two weeks after the oral hearing was concluded. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner was not given a reasonable opportunity to inspect, examine and respond to the newly produced materials which had been submitted to the learned Tribunal. The prayer of the Page No.# 3/3 petitioner is to afford a reasonable opportunity to him, to address the voluminous set of materials brought by the respondents on 19.08.2026. 4. The facts of the case shows that the oral hearing/arguments in O.A No. 131/2026 was held on 20.08.2026 and two weeks’ time had been provided to the parties, to submit their written arguments. The petitioner has thereafter submitted his written argument on 27.08.2026. As the oral hearing had concluded before the learned Tribunal on 20.08.2026 in O.A No. 131/2026 and as the written arguments had been submitted on 27.08.2026, we are not inclined to allow the present petition seeking time to respond to the alleged newly produced materials before the learned Tribunal on 19.08.2026. 5. In view of the above reasons, we are not inclined to allow the present petition, as a challenge can always be made to the decision made by the learned Tribunal, disposing off O.A No. 131/2026. As we find the case to be pre- mature, the same is accordingly dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant