Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7894 (GAU)

SMTI LAKHYA HIRA BARUAH and ANR. v. PREETAM SAIKIA and ANR

Cont.Cas(C)/55/2016 · 2026-06-09

Arun Dev Choudhury

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010201872016 2026:GAU-AS:8254 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/55/2016 SMTI LAKHYA HIRA BARUAH and ANR. ASSTT. TEACHER, BHEHPORA LP SCHOOL, DHEMAJI, W/O SRI PULIN GOGOI, R/O NALANIPAM, JONAK NAGAR, P.O. and DIST- DHEMAJI, ASSAM 2: RENU PHUKAN ASSTT. TEACHER NALANIPAM LP SCHOOL DHEMAJI W/O HEM CHANDRA PHUKAN R/O RATANPUR P.O. DHEMAJI DIST- DHEMAJI ASSA VERSUS PREETAM SAIKIA and ANR COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, EDUCATION ELE DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6 2:SANJIB KR. BHUYAN DIRECTOR ELE EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY-1 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.N BORAH, Advocate for the Respondent : MR.R MAZUMDARR-2, MR.N SARMA(R-2),MS.R M DEKA(R- 1),MR.D KONWAR(R-2),MS.R ROYCHOUDHURY(R-1),MS.M DUTTA(R-1),MR.R M DEKA(R-2) Page No.# 2/2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 10.06.2026 1. Heard Mr. N Borah, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. SMT Chistie, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This contempt petition is filed alleging willful and deliberate violation of the order dated 13.08.2015, passed in WP(C) No.2865/2010, which was preferred by the petitioners claiming arrears of salary, wherein, it was directed to the authorities to pay the salaries to the petitioners from the month of September, 2007. 3. It is submitted that in the meantime the cases of the petitioners were considered and they were accommodated as tutors by a speaking order dated 30.01.2021. 4. Mr. N Borah, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though they have been accommodated as tutors, however, they are not satisfied with such a decision and the instant contempt petition may be closed with a liberty to them to assail such appointment as tutors as they still claim that they are entitled to be appointed as Assistant Teachers. 5. In view of the aforesaid, the contempt petition stands closed with liberty, as prayed for. JUDGE Comparing Assistant