Yachulu Magh vs The Union Of India And 3 Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 4163 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Yachulu Magh vs The Union Of India And 3 Ors on 17 March, 2025

Author: Soumitra Saikia

Bench: Soumitra Saikia

                                                                           Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010087702020




                                                                    undefined

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

                                 Case No. : WP(C)/2641/2020

            YACHULU MAGH
            S/O- LATE PILO MAGH, VILL- TESOPHENYU, P.O- TSEMINYU, DIST-
            KOHIMA, NAGALAND, DISCHARGED FROM SERVICE FROM 44TH ASSAM
            RIFLES, C/O- 99 APO, PIN- 932044 PRESENTLY R/O- DIPHU, DIST- KARBI
            ANGLONG, ASSAM



            VERSUS

            THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS
            REP. BY THE SECRETARY THE GOVT OF INDIA, MIN OF HOME AFFAIRS,
            NEW DELHI- 110001

            2:THE DG ASSAM RIFLES
             HQ DG
            ASSAM RIFLES
             SHILLONG
             MEGHALAYA- 11

            3:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL
             HQ 7 SECTOR
            ASSAM RIFLES
             C/O- 99 APO

            4:THE COMMANDANT
             44TH ASSAM RIFLES
             C/O- 99 APO
             PIN- 93204

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. V KUMAR, MR. B PATHAK,MR. R THADANI

Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I., MRS. A GAYAN (C.G.C.)
                                                                         Page No.# 2/2




                                     BEFORE
                      HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

                                      ORDER

17.03.2025

Heard Mr. V Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. A. Gayan, learned CGC.

It is submitted by Mr. V Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner that on earlier occasion time was sought for to file affidavit-in-reply to the affidavit-in- opposition filed by the respondents. However, it is submitted today that the affidavit-in-reply would not be necessary to be filed in view of the judgment of the Apex Court which squarely covers the issues raised in the present writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that he does not have the copies of the relevant judgment and prays for another date to place the same before the Court.

Accordingly, let the matter be listed again on 03.04.2025.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant