Bhaben Choudhury vs Anurag Goel
2022 Latest Caselaw 2182 Gua

                                                                 Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010271872018




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

                               Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/546/2018

            BHABEN CHOUDHURY
            SON OF LATE UPENDRA NATH CHOUDHURY, RESIDENT OF KHARGULI,
            GUWAHATI- 781004, DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.



            VERSUS

            ANURAG GOEL, IAS AND ANR.
            COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HEALTH
            AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006.

            2:(a)SRI RUPAK KUMAR MAZUMDAR
             IAS
             PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DIMA HASAO AUTONOMOUS COUNSIL
             HAFLONG
             N.C. HILLS
            ASSAM
             PIN-788819.

            2:NARESH GHOSH
             PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DIMA HASAO AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL
             HAFLONG
             N.C. HILLS
            ASSAM
             PIN- 788819

Advocate for the Petitioner   : DR. B AHMED

Advocate for the Respondent : MR. K GOSWAMI
                                                                            Page No.# 2/4


                                 BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

                                       ORDER

24.06.2022 Heard Shri AU Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. It appears that on a request made earlier by this Court, Shri B. Gogoi, learned counsel has appeared for the Health Department as the incumbents who are arrayed as respondents are no longer holding the said post and there is no further arraignment of new incumbents in the proceedings.

3. The order which is the subject matter of this petition is dated 14.09.2017 passed in WP(C)/278/2016 which was disposed of in the following manner :

"There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner can be granted voluntary pension while there is a pending Departmental Proceeding against him. The scheme under which Voluntary Retirement has been sought by the petitioner has also not been shown in this writ petition. However, in view of the fact that the State respondents have stated that the petitioner's Voluntary Retirement petition would be considered after the Departmental Proceeding is completed, this Court is of the view that the Departmental Proceeding initiated against the petitioner should be completed within a short period of time as Departmental Proceeding should not be kept pending for such a long time from the date of issue of the show-cause notice.

Accordingly, in view of the reasons stated above, this Court directs the State respondent, especially the respondent No.1 to complete the Departmental Proceeding pending against the petitioner within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Thereafter, the respondent No.1 shall consider the petitioner's representation for Voluntary Retirement and shall take a decision thereon within a further period of 1 (one) Page No.# 3/4

month.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of."

4. This contempt petition was itself instituted on 07.12.2018 and till now there is no compliance of the direction of this Court.

5. Shri B. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Health Department submits that the disciplinary proceeding was in fact completed and a penalty was also prescribed which however was not approved by the APSC as the matter had to be routed through the said Commission as the petitioner is a Gazetted Officer. Thereafter, the matter was awaiting advice of the learned Advocate General and recently some decisions have been taken.

6. Though the explanation of Shri B. Gogoi may be a reasonable one, what is of immense importance is the long delay from the date of judgment which is 14.09.2017. It is failed to understand as to how the direction contained in the said order has not been complied with even after about five years. On a specific query, it is also submitted on behalf of the respondents that no attempt was made to either put to challenge the aforesaid order dated 14.09.2017 or even to file any application praying for extension of time for compliance.

7. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the utter negligence with the direction contained the order dated 14.09.2017 is itself contemptuous.

8. However, in the interest of justice, a final opportunity is granted to the respondents to comply with the order by fixing the next date as 29.07.2022 on which date an order of compliance is required to be placed before this Court.

9. It is made clear that on failing to do so, this Court would consider directing for personal appearance of all the incumbents who are responsible for compliance of the order in question.

10. A copy of this order be furnished to Shri B. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Page No.# 4/4

Health Department, who has appeared on the request of the Court.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant