Gauhati High Court
Jnyan Chandra Sarma vs The Principal Secretary To The ... on 26 May, 2023
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010112042023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2993/2023
JNYAN CHANDRA SARMA
SON OF SRI UMAKANTA SARMA,
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BARANGABARI,
P.O.- BARANGABARI,
P.S.- KHOIRABARI,
DIST.- DARRANG, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM AND 7 ORS
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
DISPUR.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
OF ASSAM
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6
DIST.- KAMRUP
ASSAM.
3:THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
ASSAM
BHANGAGARH
GUWAHATI-6
DIST. KAMRUP(M)
ASSAM.
Page No.# 2/4
4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
DARRANG
MANGALDOI
DIST.- DARRANG
ASSAM.
5:THE JOINT COMMISSIONER
PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
ASSAM.
6:THE PRESIDENT
DARRANG ZILLA PARISHAD
MANGALDOI
DIST.- DARRANG
ASSAM.
7:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
DARRANG ZILLA PARISHAD
MANGALDOI
DISTRICT- DARRANG
ASSAM.
8:THE SECRETARY
ZILLA PRAISHAD
MANGALDOI
DIST.- DARRANG
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P TALUKDAR
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P AND R.D.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
ORDER
26.05.2023
Heard Mr. P. Talukdar, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.
Page No.# 3/4
Handique, learned Standing Counsel, P & RD Department, Assam appearing for
the respondent Nos.1, 2, 3, 7 and 8 and Ms. A. Talukdar, learned Govt.
Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos.4, 5 and 6.
The petitioner herein was earlier serving as Secretary of Jhargaon Gaon
Panchayat under Darrang Zilla Parishad. Due to the conviction of the petitioner
in connection with Sessions Case No.73(DM)/2000 under Section 302 of the IPC
his service was terminated. On an appeal being Criminal Appeal No.386/2002
preferred by the petitioner before this Court, the order of conviction under
Section 302, IPC was converted and the petitioner was convicted under Section
304 Part-II of the IPC. However, taking note of the period of Jail sentence
already undergone by him, no further sentence was imposed upon the
petitioner beyond the period of 6 years 3 months already spent in the Jail.
Taking note of the Judgment and Order dated 18.08.2008 passed by the
Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal No.386/2002 the petitioner has
approached this Court by filing the present writ petition seeking an order of
reinstatement in service on the ground that he has been acquitted in the
criminal case.
The said prayer of the petitioner cannot be accepted for the following reasons.
Firstly, there has been no acquittal of the petitioner but by the judgment and
order dated 18.08.2008 the conviction of the petitioner has been converted
from one under Section 302 IPC to one under Section 304 Part-II of the IPC.
However, the conviction of the petitioner remains. Secondly, after a period of
nearly 23 years, the question of reinstatement of the petitioner in service in the
facts and circumstances of the case would not arise in the eyes of law.
For the reasons stated herein above, I do not find any good ground to entertain
Page No.# 4/4
this writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
