RAMESH CHANDRA KALITA v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS.
WP(C)/8591/2018 · 2026-01-18
Nelson Sailo
Writ Petition (Civil)body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 417 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 417 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010275782018
2026:GAU-AS:546
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/8591/2018 RAMESH CHANDRA KALITA S/O- LT LAKSHIRAM KALITA, PRINCIPAL, DAKSHIN KAMRUP COLLEGE, MIRZA, P.O. AND PS. MIRZA, KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN- 781125 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS.
REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6 2:THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HIGHER EDUCATION DEPTT. DISPUR GHY-6 3:THE DIRECTOR HIGHER EDUCATION DEPTT.
GOVT. OF ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY-1 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. O P BHATI, MR. U C DAS Advocate for the Respondent : SC, HIGHER EDU,
Page No.# 2/2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER Date : 19.01.2026
None appears for the petitioner, when the matter is called. The same was the case when the matter was listed on 08.11.2024. Mr. A. R. Tahbildar, learned counsel for the respondent, Higher Education Department, submits that the petitioner by filing this writ petition has claimed for enhancement of the age of retirement from sixty (60) years to sixty five (65) years and that during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has in fact crossed the age of sixty five (65) years. He, therefore, submits that perhaps it is due to this reason that the petitioner remains unrepresented. Be that as it may, since the counsel for the petitioner has not appeared on two (2) consecutive occasions, the writ petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant