Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010269942024 2026:GAU-AS:5912 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/698/2024 SHABANA ISHRAT KARIM D/O LATE ABDUL KARIM, VILL- WARD NO. 21, BIDYA NAGAR, DHING ROAD, P.S.-NAGAON, DIST- NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS NARAYAN KONWAR THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT (HIGHER), DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS S S ZIA, Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO ORDER Date : 29.04.2026 Heard Ms. S. S. Zia, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that this contempt petition is filed by the petitioner for non-compliance of the Court’s direction dated 15.12.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 6718 of 2023. The learned counsel submits that the writ petition was disposed of with a direction that the respondent authority concerned shall take into consideration all the claims raised by the petitioner and thereafter pass a speaking Order within a time Page No.# 2/3 frame. She submits that the respondent authority concerned, however, has not taken into consideration all the claims raised by the petitioner and has passed an Order on the wrong notion that the petitioner was a major at the time of death of her father which otherwise is not the correct position. She therefore submits that the Order dated 07.04.2025 passed by the Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Higher Education Department, purportedly in terms of the Order of this Court dated 15.12.2023 in WP(C) No. 6718 of 2023 is not a compliance of the Court’s Order. It is however noticed that in the last Paragraph of the Court’s Order, which is said to have been not complied with, Court had generally stated that the appropriate authority shall take into consideration the claims raised by the petitioner. Under such circumstance in absence of a specific direction being spelt out, it would not be possible for this Court to examine as to whether the Court’s direction was properly complied with or not. The course of action under such circumstance is to challenge the Speaking Order by way of filling a fresh writ petition, where the Court can examine the claim of the petitioner. It is also noticed that although notice was sent to the sole respondent by registered post on 23.12.2024 but notice has not been effected till date. Be that as it may, in view of the observations made herein above, this contempt petition will have to be closed. Accordingly, the contempt petition is closed. The petitioner is at liberty to resort to an appropriate remedy as may be available to her in law. A copy of the Order dated 07.04.2025 passed by the Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Higher Education Department in terms of the Court’s Order dated 15.12.2023 in WP(C) No. 6718 of 2023 is retained in record and marked Page No.# 3/3 as “X” for identification. JUDGE Comparing Assistant