Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010064972026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1037/2026 JEHIRUL ISLAM S/O LATE TAZUB ALI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BANDORMELA, KACHARI GAON, LANKA NAGAON P.O.- CHARING, DISTRICT- HOJAI, ASSAM- 782439. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, ASSAM- 781006 2:THE COMMISSIONER TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PANJABARI ASSAM- 781037 3:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR ASSAM- 781006. 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER HOJAI SANKARDEV NAGAR HOJAI ASSAM PIN-782435 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U SAIKIA, MR T NAZIB,MR. Z ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P AND R.D., GA, ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 27.03 .2026 Heard Mr. U. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A.K. Ghosh, learned Standing Counsel, P&RD Department. 2. This Interlocutory Application has been filed by the applicant seeking a correction in the order dated 25.03.2026 passed in WP(C) No. 1640 of 2026. The applicant before this Court has assailed his transfer order from his present place of posting from Sarlock Gaon Panchayat under Binakandi Development Block, Hojai to Silasuti Gaon Panchayat under Sissiborgaon Development Block, Dhemaji. The applicant is serving as Accredited Engineer on contractual basis. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner the contractual employees are not required to be transferred inter-district. Therefore, the order was challenged. 3. The respondents counsel on the other hand referring to the guidelines which is available at page No. 58 of the writ petition submits that the Commissioner, P&RD Department has the powers to transfer any person in terms of that guidelines. 4. According to the petitioner, the impugned transfer order was issued on 14.03.2025. This Court by order dated 20.03.2026 permitted the Standing Counsel of P&RD to complete his instructions and the matter was fixed on Page No.# 3/4 25.03.2026 and it was ordered that the prayer for interim order will be considered on the next date fixed which is 25.03.2026. On 25.03.2026 the Standing Counsel of P&RD Department was placed before the Court the instructions, and upon perusal of the same reveals that the petitioner was transferred in the face of certain allegations made against him about his performance and duties as reported by the Block Development Officer, Binakandi Block Development Office. Although the Standing Counsel, P&RD Department submits that the primary reason for transfer of the petitioner was rationalisation of the Accredited Engineers across the various Development Blocks. From the instructions placed before the Court, the particulars with regard to the transfer of the petitioner due to rationalisation of the transfer and posting does not appear to be supported by the reasons which are placed before the Court. Rather it appears to the Court prima-facie that there are certain allegations made against the petitioner which were also under consideration which resulted in the purported transfer of the petitioner. 5. Under such circumstances, the respondents were permitted to file their affidavit, if so advised and matter was fixed on 01.04.2026. The order of this Court also reflected that the interim order, if any passed earlier will be continued till the next date fixed. 6. It is under these circumstances, the interlocutory application has been filed wherein it is stated that the order dated 25.03.2026 passed in WP(C) No.1640/2026 requires correction as no interim order was granted. 7. Perusal of the order dated 25.03.2026 passed in WP(C) No.1640/2026 Page No.# 4/4 reveals that it does not reflect any interim order being passed or continuance of any interim order being passed. Rather the order is clear that “interim order, if any passed earlier will be continued till the next date fixed”. Therefore, if no interim order was passed and there was no direction for continuance of any interim order. 8. According to the Court, the order dated 25.03.2026 passed in WP(C) No.1640/2026 does not require any correction. 9. The prayer of the petitioner for interim order will be reconsidered on 01.04.2026. 10. With the above observation, interlocutory application stands disposed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant