Sidheswar Das vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 1761 Gua

                                                                   Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010004582020




                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                          Case No. : WP(C)/231/2020

         SIDHESWAR DAS
         S/O- LT. DHIREN DAS, R/O- VILL. PUB DHARAMTUL, P.O. DHARAMTUL,
         P.S.- JAGIROAD, DIST- MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782412.



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS.
         REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY., GOVT. OF ASSAM, PWD (B) DEPTT.,
         DISPUR, GHY-06.

         2:THE BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
         ASSAM
          BAMUNIMAIDAN
          GUWAHATI-21.

         3:THE SECY.
          BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
         ASSAM
          BAMUNIMAIDAN
          GHY.-21.

         4:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS
          MORIGAON DISTRICT CIRCLE
          MORIGAON
         ASSAM
          PIN- 782105.

         5:THE HEAD MASTER
          DHARAMTUL GOVT. AIDED HIGH SCHOOL
          DHARAMTUL
          P.O. DHARAMTUL
          DIST.- MORIGAON
                                                                                Page No.# 2/2

             (ASSAM)
             PIN- 782412

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. M U MAHMUD

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PWD

                                   BEFORE
                  HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

                                          ORDER

Date : 03.08.2021 Heard Shri M. U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri T. C. Chutia, learned standing counsel for SEBA, Shri P. Nayak, learned standing counsel is present for PWD and Shri R. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.4 & 5.

Shri T. C. Chutia is also presented before this Court a copy of the chart submitted by the concerned school, i.e. Dharamtul Govt. Aided High School to the board for the HSLC examination of the year 1982 from where the petitioner had passed the matriculation.

It is also clarified by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there were certain anomaly with regard to the year of joining in service which was initially written as 1982 by mistake which would be 1992, and in this regard a photocopy of the office order is also presented before this Court by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Hearing is concluded.

Judgment is reserved.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant