Gauhati High Court
Cont.Cas(C)/323/2018 of HUSSAIN ALI Vs RAMESH CHAND JAIN AND 2 ORS. on 5 May 2026
GAHC010135942018 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/323/2018 HUSSAIN ALI S/O- LATE MAFID ALI, VILL- SONAPUR, P.O- MUGDI, DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM VERSUS RAMESH CHAND JAIN AND 2 ORS. COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
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.
Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010135942018
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/323/2018 HUSSAIN ALI S/O- LATE MAFID ALI, VILL- SONAPUR, P.O- MUGDI, DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM VERSUS RAMESH CHAND JAIN AND 2 ORS. COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, EDUCATION (SECONDARY) DEPTT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 6 2:FANINDRA JIDUNG DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY- 19 3:BIJOY BAISHNAV INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS NALBARI DISTRICT CIRCLE NALBARI ASSAM PIN- 78133 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K GOSWAMI, MR A BARMAN Advocate for the Respondent : MR. N J KHATANIAR, SC, SEC. EDU.
Page No.# 2/2 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO O R D E R 06.05.2026 Mr. P.K. Goswami, learned counsel appears for the petitioner and submits that this contempt petition is filed for non-compliance of the Court’s direction dated 20.06.2017 passed in WP(C) No.5101/2012. Mr. N.J. Khataniar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has produced an order dated 13.04.2026 issued by the Inspector of Schools, NDC, Nalbari, by which post-facto approval has been given in favour of the petitioner for regularization against the vacant post in the same school where the petitioner was working prior to his retirement for the purpose of pensionery benefits. It may be noticed that the order of this Court dates back to 20.06.2017 and the contempt petition was filed in the year 2018, while the order of compliance comes only on 13.04.2026. It is not understood as to why such a delay has occasioned. However, since there has been compliance of the Court’s direction though belatedly, the Court is inclined to close the contempt petition with an observation that the respondent authorities concerned shall not delay in taking further necessary steps to accord pensionery benefits to the petitioner.
A copy of the order dated 13.04.2026 produced by Mr. N.J. Khataniar, learned counsel is retained on record and marked as ‘X’ for identification.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant