WP(C) 2965/2012. Gauhati High Court
| Case Number | WP(C) 2965/2012 |
| Judgement Date | July 14, 2019 |
| Court | Gauhati High Court |
I N THE GAUHATI HI GH COURT
(THE HI GH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MI ZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
WP( C) No.2965/ 2012
Sri Dinaram Bora
The State of Assam & 4 Others
… Respondents
B E F O R E
HON’BLE MR. JUSTI CE ACHI NTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA
Advocates for the Petitioner : Ms. D Singha
Advocate for the Respondents : Mr. A Chakrabarty
Government Advocate
Assam
Date of hearing & Judgment : 14.07.2017
JUDGMENT & ORDER ( ORAL)
Heard Ms. D Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A Chakraborty, learned State counsel.
-
The respondent No.5, as per the Office Note is represented by Ms. S Bora and Ms. M Bhuyan by filling the respective Vakalatnama along with their learned Senior counsel. I t is stated that the learned Senior counsel is no more. Therefore, on record, it would be Ms. S Bora and Ms. M Bhuyan who would represent the respondent No.5. However, none appears for the respondent No.5, when the matter is called upon.
…Petitioner
-Versus-
-
I t is stated that the respondent No.5 is a member of the public of Gohaingaon village in the district of Golaghat and at the instance of the said respondent No.5, certain complaints were lodged against the present petitioner, who is a Gaonburah, resulting in the impugned termination order against the Gaonburah.
-
I n view of the order proposed to be passed, this Court deems it appropriate that the said respondent No.5 in any view of the matter, need not be heard for the present.
-
The petitioner was appointed as a Gaonburah of Gohaingaon village as per the order dated 13.09.2005 of the Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat. I t is the case of the petitioner that although the petitioner was discharging his duties as Gaonburah with honesty and sincerity by implementing various welfare schemes of the Government, but certain individuals of the village who had the intention of misappropriating the Government funds were dissatisfied, and, accordingly, had lodged a complaint against the petitioner.
-
On the basis of such complaint, the petitioner was initially placed under suspension. Thereafter, by the order dated 19.07.2011, the Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat had constituted an enquiry committee to enquire into the allegations made against the petitioner. I t is stated that neither the petitioner was allowed to participate in the said enquiry nor the petitioner was provided with any report of such enquiry.
-
I t is also stated that subsequently, the petitioner came to learn from the Circle Officer...
To continue reading
Request your trial