Page No.# 1/4 vs Mamoni Borah And 2 Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 4793 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/4 vs Mamoni Borah And 2 Ors on 28 June, 2024

                                                                   Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010087282024




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

                         Case No. : Review.Pet./99/2024

         THE NORTH EASTERN REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF WATER AND LAND
         MANAGEMENT AND 2 ORS.
         AN AUTONOMOUS SOCIETY UNDER THE NEC, GOVT. OF INDIA,
         DOLABARI, P.O.- KALIABHOMORA, TEZPUR, PIN- 784027, DIST. SONITPUR,
         ASSAM.

         2: THE DIRECTOR
          NORTH EASTERN REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF WATER AND LAND
         MANAGEMENT
          DOLABARI
          P.O.- KALIABHOMORA
         TEZPUR
          PIN- 784027
          DIST. SONITPUR
         ASSAM.

         3: THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER
          NORTH EASTERN REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF WATER AND LAND
         MANAGEMENT
          DOLABARI
          P.O.- KALIABHOMORA
         TEZPUR
          PIN- 784027
          DIST. SONITPUR
         ASSAM

         VERSUS

         MAMONI BORAH AND 2 ORS.
         W/O MOHAN CHANDRA BORAH,
         VILL.- DEKARGAON, KUNDURABARI, BALIPUKHURI PANCHAYAT, DIST.-
         SONITPUR, PIN- 784501.

         2:THE UNION OF INDIA
                                                                      Page No.# 2/4

            REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF DEVELOPMENT OF
            NORTH-EASTERN REGION (DONER)
            GOVT. OF INDIA
            NEW DELHI.

            3:THE NORTH EASTERN COUNCIL
             REP. BY THE SECRETARY
             NEC SECRETARIAT
             SHILLONG- 793003

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. R K D CHOUDHURY

Advocate for the Respondent : FOR CAVEATOR




                                  BEFORE
                 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

                                        ORDER

Date : 28.06.2024

Heard Mr. R. K. D. Choudhury, learned counsel for the review petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The review petitioner, by way of filing the present review petition has prayed for a review of the Judgment & Order, dated 27.03.2024, passed by this Court in WP(C)/479/2013.

3. One of the grounds on which the review of the said Judgment & Order dated 27.03.2024 is sought, is that in Paragraph-13 of the said Judgment & Order, this Court had directed that the benefits now so extended to the petitioner be so extended to her w.e.f. 01.02.2002. It is contended that the said benefits can only be extended w.e.f., the date the petitioner had joined her services in the organization.

Page No.# 3/4

4. On perusal of the materials available on record, it is clear that a typographical error had occasioned in Paragraph-13 of the said Judgment & Order, dated 27.03.2024 while providing the date from which the petitioner was required to be extended her benefits. Accordingly, the same is now being rectified.

5. The date "01.02.2002" as appearing in Paragraph-13 would required to be now be read as "the date on which the petitioner had joined her services in pursuance to the interview held on 23.07.2005".

6. The sentence wherein an apparent typographical error has occasioned in Paragraph-13 of the writ petition, reads as under:-

"The said benefit would be extended to the petitioner w.e.f.

01.02.2002, i.e. the date when the casual/Muster Roll workers working in the Organization were brought over to the regular Scale of Pay against the sanctioned posts."

Accordingly, the above sentence as occasioning in Paragraph-13 of the said Judgment & Order, dated 27.03.2024, on correction of the typographical error would now read as follows:

"The said benefit would be extended to the petitioner w.e.f.

the date of her joining in pursuance to the interview held on 23.07.2005."

Page No.# 4/4

7. The Judgment and Order, dated 27.02.2024, passed by this Court in WP(C)/479/2013 would now be read along with this order for all purpose and this order would form a part of the said Judgment and Order, dated 27.02.2024.

8. The other grounds as urged in the review petition being on the grounds of merit, this Court holds that the respondents in guise of the present review petition cannot claim to have a re-hearing in the matter. Accordingly, the other grounds as urged in the review petition are not being considered.

9. The review petition with the above clarifications and corrections stands disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant