Jahanara Ahmed vs Smti Juri Phukan
2025 Latest Caselaw 1536 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Jahanara Ahmed vs Smti Juri Phukan on 28 July, 2025

Author: Soumitra Saikia

Bench: Soumitra Saikia

                                                                           Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010059392025




                                                                    undefined

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

                                  Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/375/2025

            JAHANARA AHMED
            W/O FAKARUDDIN AHMED, VILL- MOHILA, P.O.-CHANDMAMA, DISST-
            BARPETA, ASSAM



            VERSUS

            SMTI JURI PHUKAN, IAS
            DIRECTOR, WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
            UZANBAZAR, GUWAHATI-01, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. A H M R CHOUDHURY, MR N RAHMAN

Advocate for the Respondent : ,




                                    BEFORE
                     HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

                                             ORDER

28.07.2025 Heard Mr. N.Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner.

This contempt petition has been filed praying for issuance of directions as the respondents have failed to carry out the directions contained in the order dated 04.06.2024 passed in W.P(C) No. 5453/2023 & Ors.

Page No.# 2/2

Upon perusal of the said order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench, it is seen that at Paragarph-19 of the Judgment, the writ petition have been dismissed. However, liberty was granted to the petitioner to produce all relevant documents before the Director, Social Welfare and thereby a fresh enquiry can be undertaken. The petitioner claims to have filed the necessary documents but no order has been passed by the respondents. Under such circumstances, the contempt petition has been filed.

Upon perusal of the order dated 04.06.2024 passed in W.P.(C) No. 5453/2023 & Ors, it is seen the writ petitions have been dismissed and there is no specific direction to the respondents to carry out the enquiry made, however, it was left open to the authorities to look into the grievances upon such petition being filed by the petitioner.

If that be so and if there is any further grievance, it will be open for the petitioner to assail such a cause of action. Therefore in the facts and circumstances of this case, the contempt petition is not maintainable.

Accordingly, the contempt petition stands dismissed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant