WP(C) 5556/2010. Gauhati High Court
| Case Number | WP(C) 5556/2010 |
| Judgement Date | March 30, 2021 |
| Court | Gauhati High Court |
I N THE GAUHATI HI GH COURT
THE HI GH COURT OF ASSAM : NAGALAND : MI ZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
WP( C) NO. 5556 OF 2010
Sri Nalini Nath
S/ o. Late Niral Chandra Nath R/ o. Vill & P.O. Changsari Dist- Kamrup(Rural), Assam
........... Pet it ion er
- VERSUS -
-
The State of Assam represented by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Hill Areas Department and Director of the Board, Assam Hills Small I ndustries Development Corporation Limited, Dispur, Ghy-6
-
The Deputy Commissioner, Karbi Anglong District, Assam and Director of the Board, Assam Hills Small I ndustries Development Corporation Limited, Diphy, Karbi Anglong, Assam
-
The Deputy Commissioner, North Cachar Hills District, Assam and Director of the Board, Assam Hills Small I ndustries Development Corporation Limited, Diphy, Karbi Anglong
-
The Chairman, Assam Hills Small I ndustries Development Corporation Limited, Diphy, Karbi Anglong
-
The Managing Director, Assam Hills Small I ndustries Development Corporation Limited, Diphy, Karbi Anglong
..……. Respon den t s
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTI CE NELSON SAI LO
Advocate for the Petitioner :- Mr. D K Das
Advocate for the Respondents :- Mr. A Chakraborty
For respondent No. 1
Date of Hearing & Judgment :- 30.03.2017
Page 1 of 5
JUDGMENT & ORDER ( Oral)
Heard Mr. D K Das, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner as well as Mr. A Chakraborty, the learned Government advocate appearing for the respondent No.1. None appears for the respondent Nos. 2 to 5.
-
The case of the writ petitioner is that he was initially appointed as a
probationer against the post of Accounts Assistant in the office of the Assam Hills Small Scale I ndustries Development Corporation Limited (the corporation hereafter). The corporation is a Government of Assam Undertaking and the petitioner, after successful completion of his probation period was temporarily appointed to the said post on 31.01.1983 w.e.f. 01.02.1983.
-
The learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that as the corporation
was not functioning regularly, the petitioner was absent for some days. The respondent No. 5 vide order dated 10.01.2006 (Annexure-1) issued an order pursuant to the decision taken in the 136th Adjourned Board Meeting indicating the absence period of the employees under the corporation, wherein, the name of the petitioner was also included showing him to be absent for a total number of 339 days. That in terms of the same Board Meeting and the decision taken, 117...
To continue reading
Request your trial