Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 2040 Gua
Judgement Date : 6 August, 2025
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010084762022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2961/2022
NIHAR PRASAD SHARMA
S/O-LATE BARADA PRASAD SHARMA
R/O- FLAT NO. 2B, ARCHON ARCADE
DR. B BARUAH ROAD
P.O- ULUBARI
P.S- PALTAN BAZAR
DIST- KAMRUP (M)
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT QUARTER NO. D-16, NUMALIGARH REFINERY
LTD. TOWNSHIP
P.O- N.R PROJECT
DIST- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM
PIN-785699
VERSUS
NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED AND 3 ORS
A GOVT. OF INDIA ENTERPRISE HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
122A, G.S. ROAD, CHRISTIANBASTI, GUWAHATI-781005, ASSAM
2:THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED
A GOVT. OF INDIA ENTERPRISE HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
122A
G.S. ROAD
CHRISTIANBASTI
GUWAHATI-781005
ASSAM
3:THE DIRECTOR (TECHNICAL)
NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED
A GOVT. OF INDIA ENTERPRISE HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
122A
Page No.# 2/3
G.S. ROAD
CHRISTIANBASTI
GUWAHATI-781005
ASSAM
4:SMTI MADHUCHANDA ADHIKARY DGM (CC)
PRESIDING OFFICER
INTERNAL COMMITTEE FOR SEXUAL HARRASMENT OF WOMEN FOR
WORK PLACE
NUMALIGARH REFINERY LIMITED
A GOVT. OF INDIA ENTERPRISE
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 122A
G.S. ROAD
CHRISTIANBASTI
GUWAHATI-781005
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P KATAKI, MRS R BEGUM,MS. M DEVI
Advocate for the Respondent : MS M HAZARIKA (R-1 to 3), MR D KHAN (R-4),MR D KHAN (R-
1 to 3)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
ORDER
Date : 06.08.2025
Heard Mr. P. Kakati, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Hazarika, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. D. Khan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents
By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the letters dated 30.03.2022 and 20.04.2022, issued by the respondent No.2, whereby an appeal filed by the petitioner was rejected and the petitioner was directed to file written submission before the disciplinary authorities.
Page No.# 3/3
It is submitted at the bar that during the pendency of the instance writ petition, the initial report filed by the ICC was set aside and the matter was sent back to the ICC to conclude the proceedings within a reasonable time. It is also submitted at the bar that a review against the aforesaid judgment and order of the co-ordinate Bench of this court was filed; however, the same was dismissed.
That being so nothing survives for adjudication in the writ proceedings. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed on being insfructuous.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!