Md. Zakir Hussain v. The Assam State Electricity Board and 8 Ors

PageoNo.#o1/3 GAHC010009002015 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/901/2015o MD.oZAKIRoHUSSAINo S/OoRAFIKUDDINoAHMED,oVILL.oKANIKUCHI,oP.O.oKANIHA,oP.S.oRANGIA,o DIST-oKAMRUP,oASSAM VERSUSo THEoASSAMoSTATEoELECTRICITYoBOARDoando8oORSo THROUGHoITSoCHAIRMAN,oBIJULEEoBHAVAN,oPALTANoBAZAR,oGHY-8 2:THEoCHIEFoGENERALoMANAGERoHR oAPDCL oBIJULEEoBHAVAN oPALTANoBAZAR oGHY-8 3:THEoCHIEFoGENERALoMANAGERoD oAPDCL oBIJULEEoBHAVAN oPALTANoBAZAR oGHY-8 4:THEoDY.oPERSONNELoMANAGER oO/OoTHEoCHIEFoGENERALoMANAGERoD oAPDCLoLAR oBIJULEEoBHAVAN oPALTANoBAZAR oGHY-8 5:THEoGENERALoMANAGER oGUWAHATIoZONE oAPDCLoLAR oDWARANDHA PageoNo.#o2/3 oSIXoMILE oGHY-22 6:THEoCHIEFoEXECUTIVEoOFFICER oRANGIAoELECTRICALoCIRCLE oAPDCLoLAR oRANGIA oDIST-oKAMRUP 7:THEoDY.oGENERALoMANAGER oRANGIAoELECTRICALoCIRCLE oAPDCLoLAR oRANGIA oDIST-oKAMRUP 8:THEoSECY. oPERSONNELoBoDEPTT.oGOVT.oOFoASSAM oDISPUR oGHY-6 9:THEoSECY. oPOWERoEoDEPTT. oGOVT.oOFoASSAM oDISPUR oGHY-o AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.SoALI,oMR.SoSHARMA,MR.NoNoUPADHAYA,MR.PoKo BORDOLOIo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:o,oSC,oPOWERoGRID(R9),SC,oPERSONNELoDEPT.(R8),SC,oAoSoEo B(R1-7)oo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo BEFORE HONOURABLEoMR.oJUSTICEoSUMANoSHYAM ORDERo

22.10.2024 None appears for the writ petitioner when the matter is called up. Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam is present on behalf of respondent Nos.8 and 9 whereas, Mr. W. Ahmed, learned counsel representing Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, APDCL, is Page No.# 3/3 present on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 7. By filing this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint him as "Sahayak" pursuant to the process initiated vide advertisement notice issued in the year 2013. The prayer of the petitioner appears to be based on another judgment of this Court passed in WP(C) No.125/2010 which was upheld in Writ Appeal No.302/2010. Be that as it may, the petitioner has not appeared to argue the matter today and on the previous occasion also, his counsel have pleaded lack of instruction and therefore, had failed to advance any argument in the matter. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that no live issue survives in this writ petition for adjudication. That apart, the petitioner also does not appear to be keen in pursuing the writ petition. As such, the writ petition stand dismissed for non-prosecution.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant