Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010014222026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1022/2026 HIMANSHU SHEKHAR S/O LATE SHASHI BHUSHAN THAKUR JAI PRAKASH PATH, LANE NO. 10 SHASTRI NAGAR, KHADI BHANDAR MUZAFFARPUR BIHAR PIN 842002 VERSUS FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, 16-20 BARAKHAMBA LANE ,NEW DELHI-110001. 2:THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FCI N E ZONE ULUBARI .GLP BUILDING G.S. ROAD GUWAGATI -781007 3:THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER FCI DIVISIONAL OFFICE TEZPU Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. G K GUPTA, Advocate for the Respondent : SC, F C I, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 27.03 .2026 Heard Mr. G.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Page No.# 2/3 B.K. Singh, learned Standing Counsel, FCI. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is serving as a Depot-in-Charge at Food Storage Depot, Tangla, Udalguri, Assam as Manager D and he is also serving as Shed In-Charge of Shed No.1. The petitioner allowed the 195 bags of rice to be lifted (distributed/collected) for Daipam Gram Panchayat, Samabai Samiti for September, in addition to the allocation for August, in that connection certain allegations were made claiming that the said lifting of rice was not authorized and thereafter, the petitioner was transferred to Silchar and an enquiry was instituted. Two of the charges were found to be partially proved and one charge was found to be proved in full. Consequent to the enquiry conducted, the departmental authorities dismissed the writ petitioner from the service. The petitioner thereafter, preferred an appeal on 19.11.2025. The said appeal has not yet been disposed of by the authority. Being aggrieved he has approached this Court. 3. On 25.02.2026 on the request made by the learned Standing Counsel, FCI the matter stood deferred enabling the learned counsel for the respondent to complete his instructions. 4. Today when the matter is listed, the learned counsel for the respondent FCI submits that the appeal has already been rostered in the list of priority cases and is likely to be taken up shortly. However, no specific time frame has been indicated in the instructions, which have been placed before the Court. Although the writ petitioner has challenged the penalty order before Court and sought a direction for reinstatement of the petitioner. The fact remains that prior Page No.# 3/3 to approaching this Court a statutory appeal has been filed on 19.11.2025 and the same has been pending since then. 5. Since the petitioner has already pursued his statutory remedy available to him and is awaiting for appropriate orders to be passed by the authorities, this Court at this stage considers it proper to close the writ petition directing the respondent FCI authority to expeditiously consider the appeal, which stated to have been preferred by the petitioner on 19.11.2025 and thereafter, pass appropriate orders thereon. Needless to say, while disposing of the appeal, the appellate authority will give all opportunities to the writ petitioner to be heard and any such order that may be passed a copy thereof should be served on the writ petitioner. 6. Let this exercise be completed within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. It is made clear that since the Court has not considered the merits of the case, it will be open for the petitioner to approach this Court if his grievances subsist even after disposal of the appeal. 7. This writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant