Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010174112020 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5459/2020 AS PER, HON'BLE COURT'S ORDER DTD. 13/6/22 PETITIONER NO 1 GS 196492N OEM MANJUL PHUKAN IS STRUCK OFF AND 18 ORS S/O LATE L.N. PHUKAN, 1523 RMOL/110 RCC, C/O 56 APO PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NO 2 POWA SAIKIA DHEMAJI PO NORUATHAN DISTRICT DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN 787058 2: GS 185523 H UDC JAWAHAR LAL PRASAD HQ 753-TF/HMK C/O 56 APO 3: GS 189685 L LDC SONTOSH KUMAR SARMA PASSED 332 RMPL/51 RCC/50 TF 4: AS PER HON'BLE COURT'S ORDER DTD. 07/4/21 PETITIONER NO. 4 GS 191992 F MSN MONOJ KUMAR IS STRUCK OFF 398 RMPL/130 RCC 5: GS 191986 N MSN MANISH KUMAR SINGH 204 PWPL/1445 RCC 6: GS 187541 K PNR RAJ NARAYAN PRASAD HQ CE(P) ANURAK C/O 99 APO 7: GS 187396 H CARP PRAMOD KUMAR 67 RCC/HIRAK /C/O 56 APO 8: GS 193400 L PNR PANKAJ KUMAR Page No.# 2/6 1611 PC/50 TF (P)HMK 9: GS 192049 H MSN ANAND KUMAR SINGH 1447 BCC/(P) HIRAK 10: GS 186999 F PNR ARJUN SINGH 1649 PC C/O 56 APO 11: GS 183824 N MSN BAYASHAKAR SAHEBRAO JANRAO 424 RMPL/1446 BCC/572 TF 12: GS 191975 MSN RAMESH KUMAR 494/105 RCC HQ BMK 13: GS 186928 A PNR ROSHAN SUNAM 1604 PC/24 TF/HQ CE (P) PSK 14: AS PER HON'BLE COURT'S ORDER DTD. 15/06/21 PETITIONER NO. 14 IS STRUCK OFF 15: GS 193182 X PNR PAWAR BALU SAHEBRAO 518 SS AND TC/48 TF/UDK 16: AS PER HON'BLE COURT'S ORD. DTD. 15/6/21 PETITIONER NO 16 IS STRUCK OFF 17: GS 187531 A PNR MURARI KUMAR MISHRA 1606 PC/763 TF/(P) VTK 18: AS PER HON'BLE COURT'S ORDER DTD. 23.11.2022 PASSED IN I.A. (C) 3280/2022 THE PETITIONER NO.-18 GS 189570 X RR DVR MAHESH CHANDRA KHARKWAL 46 BR (I) TF (P) PSK IS STRUCK OFF 19: GS 183360 F MSN SUBHASH DAS 130 RCC C/O 99 AP VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 15 ORS. REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF SURFACE TRANSPORT, NEW DELHI-110003. Page No.# 3/6 2:SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF DEGENCE NEW DELHI-110003. 3:SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSION (DEPTT. OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING) NEW DELHI-110003. 4:STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION BLOCK NO.12 CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NOW DELHI-110003. 5:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL BORDER ROADS ORGANISATION SENA SADAK BHAWAN NEW DELHI-110003. 6:THE SENIOR RECORDS OFFICER RECORD OFFICE GENERAL RESERVE ENGINEER FORCE DIGHI CAMP PUNE-411015. 7:ADGBR (EAST) GUWAHATI BRO COMPLEX LANKESWAR VIP ROAD C/O. 99 APO PIN-781014. 8:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PROJECT HIMANK C/O. 56 APO PIN-931710. 9:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PROJECT SWASTIC Page No.# 4/6 C/O. 99 APO PIN-931717. 10:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PROJECT ARUNAK C/O. 99 APO PIN-961719. 11:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PROJECT STF HIRAK C/O. 56 APO PIN-931724. 12:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PROJECT BRAHMANK C/O. 99 APO PIN-931722. 13:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PROJECT BRAHMANK C/O. 99 APO PIN-931711. 14:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PROJECT UDYAK C/O. 99 APO PIN-931715 15:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PROJECT VARTAK C/O. 56 APO PIN-931716. 16:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PROJECT SAMPARK C/O. 56 APO PIN-931712 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P MAHANTA, MS. P SAHARIA Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I., MRS. R DEVI Page No.# 5/6 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 05.10.2026 Heard Shri P. Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. R. Devi, learned CGC. This case is pending since the year 2020 and on the last occasion, this Court had recorded the submission of Shri Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioners that there were unconfirmed reports that the petitioners had got the relief. The matter pertains to a claim for promotion to Group-B Junior Engineer (Civil) from Group-C. There are 19 nos. of petitioners and they have raised a common grievance that their lengths of services and experiences have not been taken into proper consideration. Ms. Devi, learned CGC has however submitted that in the meantime, out of 19 nos. of petitioners, 15 nos. of petitioners have been promoted after consideration of their cases and 4 nos. of petitioners being petitioner nos. 7, 9, 10 and 17 could not be promoted as they could not be qualified in the DPC. This Court is of the opinion that since the grievance of the 15 nos. of petitioners have been redressed and it also appears that the remaining 4 nos. of petitioners were also considered in which they have failed in the DPC, the continuation of the writ petition is not necessary. Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed. Liberty is however given to the 4 nos. of petitioners to approach appropriate forum for redressal of their grievances, if they are aggrieved by the action of the Page No.# 6/6 respondent authorities by which they have been held to be unfit for such promotion. JUDGE Comparing Assistant