Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010023292026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/312/2026 JYOTSNA RANI BARMAN W/O- DHRUBA KUMAR TALUKDAR, R/O VILL- BARPETA ROAD, P.O. AND P.S.- BARPETA ROAD, DISTRICT- BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN-781315 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6, ASSAM 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 ASSAM. 3:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM, KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19. 4:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19. 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BONGAIGAON ASSAM, PIN-783380 6:THE SECRETARY BONGAIGAON DISTRICT ACADEMIC COUNCIL BONGAINGAON ASSAM, PIN-783380 Page No.# 2/3 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M SMITH, MRS. R BORBORA,MS. N DEY Advocate for the Respondent : SC. EDU., GA, ASSAM Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/70/2026 JYOTSNA RANI BARMAN W/O- DHRUBA KUMAR TALUKDAR R/O VILL- BARPETA ROAD P.O. AND P.S.- BARPETA ROAD DISTRICT- BARPETA ASSAM PIN-781315 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 ASSAM 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 ASSAM. 3:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19. 4:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19. 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BONGAIGAON ASSAM Page No.# 3/3 PIN-783380 6:THE SECRETARY BONGAIGAON DISTRICT ACADEMIC COUNCIL BONGAINGAON ASSAM PIN-783380. ------------ Advocate for : MR A C BORBORA Advocate for : SC EDU appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 17.02.2026 Heard Mr. M. Smith, learned counsel for the applicant and also heard Mr. U. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the opposite parties. Mr. Smith submits that during the pendency of these interlocutory applications, the applicant has been dismissed from service by the respondent authorities and as such, he is not going to pursue these interlocutory applications and the same may be closed granting him liberty to challenge the dismissal order. Prayer is allowed. Liberty will remain with the applicant to approach this Court again by filing appropriate petition/application. In view of above, these I.A.s stand closed. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE