Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7751 (GAU)

UDDIPTA DAS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 9 ORS.

WP(C)/3599/2021 · 2026-06-09

Kaushik Goswami

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010104092021 2026:GAU-AS:8135 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3599/2021 UDDIPTA DAS S/O- LT. JATIN CHANDRA DAS, R/O- WARD NO.2, HOWLY, P.O. AND P.S. HOWLY, DIST.- BARPETA, ASSAM, 781316 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 9 ORS. REP. BY THE CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, ASSAM SECRETARIAT, DISPUR, GHY-06 2:THE ADDL. CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONNEL DEPTT. ASSAM SECRETARIAT DISPUR GHY-06 3:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPTT. ASSAM SECRETARIAT DISPUR GHY-06 4:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PENSION AND PUBLIC GRIEVANCES DEPTT. ASSAM SECRETARIAT DISPUR GHY-06 5:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES BARPETA DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 PIN- 781301 6:THE DISTRICT MALARIA OFFICER BARPETA DISTRICT ASSAM PIN- 791301 7:THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENTS REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY ASSAM SECRETARIAT DISPUR GHY-06 8:THE DY. COMMISSIONER BARPETA DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301 9:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENTS BARPETA DISTRICT REP. BY THE DY. COMMISSIONER BARPETA DISTRICT ASSAM PIN- 781301 10:THE ADDL. DY. COMMISSIONER BARPETA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 78130 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A GOYAL, MR. J P MORE,MS R OJAH,MR. A CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, FINANCE DEPTT.,SC, HEALTH Page No.# 3/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER Date : 10.06.2026 Heard Mr. P. Saraogi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Bora, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9 and 10; Ms. S. Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 as well as Mr. A. Chaliha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3. The issue involved in the writ petition is for consideration of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015. Today, when the matter is called, Mr. P. Saraogi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that in the meantime the petitioner has been appointed to a government post. Accordingly, nothing survives for adjudication in the matter. Resultantly, the writ petition stands closed on being withdrawn. JUDGE Comparing Assistant