Gauhati High Court
Cont.Cas(C)/381/2020 of SATYA BORGOHAIN Vs PHANINDRA JIDUNG, AES AND ANR. on 10 June 2026
GAHC010117682020 2026:GAU-AS:8300 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/381/2020 SATYA BORGOHAIN S/O LT. KHAGI BORGOHAIN, R/O VILL. SILI ASOMIA GOAN, P.O. BHAGAWAN, DIST. DHEMAJI, ASSAM, PIN-787057 VERSUS PHANINDRA JIDUNG,
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010117682020
2026:GAU-AS:8300
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/381/2020
SATYA BORGOHAIN
S/O LT. KHAGI BORGOHAIN, R/O VILL. SILI ASOMIA GOAN, P.O.
BHAGAWAN, DIST. DHEMAJI, ASSAM, PIN-787057
VERSUS
PHANINDRA JIDUNG, AES AND ANR.
THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM, KAHILIPARA, GUWAHATI-19, ASSAM, DIST. KAMRUP, PIN-781019
2:SMTI. MAMATA HOJAI
AES
THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
ASSAM
KAHILIPARA
GUWAHATI-19
ASSAM
DISTRICT-KAMRUP
PIN NO.781019
Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS A BUJARBARUAH, Advocate for the Respondent : MS. R MAZUMDAR, SC, SEC. EDU.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Page No.# 2/2
11-06-2026
This court under its order dated 23.09.2019 passed in WP(C) 6543/2015 directed the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for provincialisation of his service as an Assistant Teacher (Arts) in Sili Surjyodai High School in terms of the Act, 2017. The respondent has in the meantime carried out an exercise and found that the name of the petitioner was not even sent by District Level Scrutiny Committee, which is required under Section 12 of the Act, 2017. Accordingly, citing such reason, the speaking order dated 29.03.2023 was passed. In view of the aforesaid, the order dated 23.09.2019 passed in WP(C) 6543/2015 stands complied with. Accordingly, the contempt petition stands closed. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach appropriate forum in the event he is aggrieved by non-sending of his name by the District Level Scrutiny Committee. JUDGE Comparing Assistant