Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010028722026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/431/2026 MANORANJAN NARZARY S/O LATE LALIT NARZARY, R/O MATHURA NAGAR, P.O. and P.S. DISPUR, GHY-6, DIST- KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, IN THE MINISTRY OF YOUTH WELFARE and SPORTS. SHASTRI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-1 2:THE UDNER SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA NSS MINISTRY OF YOUTH WELFARE and SPORTS. SHASTRI BHAWAN NEW DELHI-1 3:THE YOUTH OFFICER REGIONAL CENTRE NATIONAL SERVICE SCHEME GUWAHATI ASSAM MATHURA NAGAR UNDER P.O. and P.S. DISPUR GHY-6 DIST- KAMRUP ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR G CHOUDHURY, Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 18.02.2026 Heard Mr. G Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The present Interlocutory Application has been instituted praying for correction of a fact recorded in the judgment and order dated 10.06.2024 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 5809/2012. 3. It is submitted that in paragraph 28 of the said judgment, this Court had recorded that the petitioner was found to have superannuated from his service during the pendency of these proceedings. It is submitted by Mr. G Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner, in fact, would retire from his services on reaching the age of superannuation w.e.f 28.02.2026. In view of the above, an inadvertent error had occasioned in paragraph 28 of the said judgment and order dated 10.06.2024. 4. Paragraph 28 of the judgment and order dated 10.06.2024 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 5809/2012 reads as follows : “28. In view of the conclusions as reached herein above, the petitioner also having been found to have superannuated from his services during the pendency of this proceeding, this Court is of the considered view that the Memorandum dated 03/17.08.2012, cannot be sustained on the ground of the delay in issuance of the same as well as the charges leveled against the petitioner therein being already decided in the criminal case so instituted against him, this Court proceeds to set aside the Memorandum dated 03/17.08.2012.” Appreciating the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the contentions raised in the present Interlocutory Application, an inadvertent error is found to have occasioned in paragraph 28 of the said judgment and order, and the same is rectified and accordingly, paragraph 28 would now read as follows : Page No.# 3/3 “28 In view of the conclusions reached hereinabove, the petitioner, who is stated to superannuate from his services w.e.f 28.02.2026, this Court is of the considered view that the Memorandum dated 03/17.08.2012, cannot be sustained on the ground of the delay in issuance of the same as well as the charges leveled against the petitioner therein being already decided in the criminal case so instituted against him, this Court proceeds to set aside the Memorandum dated 03/17.08.2012.” 5. The judgment and order dated 10.06.2024 shall be read along with the present order for all intent and purpose. 6. With the above observations and directions, the present Interlocutory Application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant