Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 4823 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors on 15 July, 2024

Author: Sanjay Kumar Medhi

Bench: Sanjay Kumar Medhi

                                                                Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010040612020




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

                         Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/561/2020 in
                            WP(C)/2529/2019 (D/O)

         KHAGEN DEKA AND 8 ORS.
         S/O LATE GAJEN DEKA, R/O VILL. MADHUPUR, NORTH GUWAHATI, P.O.
         COLLEGE NAGAR, DIST. KAMRUP (R), PIN 781031, ASSAM.

         2: GANESH THAKURIA
          S/O- SRI PARESH THAKURIA
          R/O- VILL- AND P.O- DADARA
          DIST- KAMRUP
          PIN- 781104
         ASSAM

         3: NITUMONI KALITA
          S/O- SRI KHONINDRA KALITA
          R/O- VILL- SONARIPARA
          SUALKUCHI
          DIST- KAMRUP
          PIN- 781103
         ASSAM

         4: KUMUD DAS
          S/O- LATE GIRIDHAR DAS
          R/O- VILL AND P.O- DORAKAHARA
          DIST- KAMRUP
          PIN- 781101
         ASSAM

         5: BHUPEN CHOUDHURY
          S/O- LATE RATNA PR. CHOUDHURY
          R/O- VILL- BAUSHI
          ORGAL
          P.O- TETELIA
          DIST- KAMRUP
          PIN- 781104
                                                      Page No.# 2/4

ASSAM

6: GIRINDRA NATH
 S/O- LATE KAMALA KANTA NATH
 R/O- VILL- ABHOYPUR
 P.O- COLLEGE NAGAR
 DIST- KAMRUP
 PIN- 781031
ASSAM

7: REKIBUDDIN AHMED
 S/O- ALI HUSSAIN
 R/O- VILL- SATGAON
 P.O- BARBAKA
 DIST- KAMRUP
 PIN- 781030
ASSAM

8: RABIN DAS
 S/O- SRI KANTA DAS
 R/O- VILL AND P.O- DADARA
 DIS- KAMRUP
 PIN- 781104
ASSAM

9: DEBABRAT DAS
 S/O- LATE HEMANTA DAS
 R/O- VILL AND P.O- DADARA
 P.S- HAJO
 DIST- KAMRUP
 PIN- 781104
ASSA

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO DEPTT. OF POWER
, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006

2:THE ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED
 BIJULI BHAWAN
 PALTAN BAZAR
 GHY- 01

3:THE ASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY GRID CORPORATION LIMITED
 BIJULI BHAWAN
 PALTAN BAZAR
 GHY- 01
                                                                               Page No.# 3/4


              4:THE APDCL
               BIJULI BHAWAN
               PALTAN BAZAR
               GHY- 01

              5:THE CHIEF GM (HRA)
              APDCL
               BIJULI BHAWAN
               PALTAN BAZAR
               GHY- 0

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. A GANGULY

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, APDCL




                                   BEFORE
                  HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

                                          ORDER

15.07.2024.

Heard Shri A Ganguli, learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard Shri W Ahmed, learned counsel representing the APDCL.

The instant application has been filed in a disposed of writ petition for declaration of result in respect of the posts of Office-cum- Field Assistant, Shayak and Mali.

Shri Ganguli, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that a number of writ petitions, including WP(C)/2529/2019 were disposed of vide a common judgment and order dated 27.08.2019 whereby certain directions were made for examining the candidatures of the applicants-petitioners.

In the instant interlocutory application, a prayer has been made for declaration of results and also to stay further actions of short listing of candidates for recruitment.

Whether an interlocutory application would be maintainable on a disposed of matter, that too, wherein independent reliefs are sought for is itself questionable. Further, it is seen that the relief sought for pertain to a period of the year 2019-2020.

Page No.# 4/4

The applicants also admittedly did not avail any other recourse available in law.

Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that the grievance sought to be espoused by filing an interlocutory application in a disposed of writ petition, more particularly, the nature of the relief claimed, the instant interlocutory application is not maintainable.

The interlocutory application, accordingly stands dismissed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant