Satyaban Talukdar v. The State of Assam and 2 Ors

ORDER Date : 29.11.2023 Heard Mr. P. Kataki, learned counsel for the review petitioner. Also heard Mr. J. Handique, learned standing counsel for the respondent no.1, Mr. A. Chaliha, learned standing counsel for the respondent no.2, and Mr. K.K. Page No.# 3/4 Bhattacharyya, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent no.3.

¶2This application for review is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.08.2023, passed by this Court in WP(C) 1964/2022.

¶3The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that this Court had accepted the stand of the learned Govt. Advocate that there was no vacancy in the promotional post. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the respondent no.3 to project that the respondent no.3 had never taken a stand that there was no vacancy for the post of Senior Assistant. Hence, it is submitted that the finding of this Court that the entire exercise would be an exercise in futility was passed on incorrect premises. Accordingly, it is submitted that this is a fit and proper case for exercising review jurisdiction and to revisit the order impugned in this review petition.

¶4The learned departmental counsel as well as the learned Govt. Advocate have made their submissions.

¶5The Court finds that reasons are assigned in the order impugned in this review petition for rejecting the prayer made in the writ petition. Insofar as the stand of the respondent authorities that there was no vacancy available is also found to be contained in paragraph-6 of the order dated 11.12.2018 passed by this Court in WP(C) 194/2017.

¶6Under such circumstances, if any error has crept in the order, it cannot be said that there was an inadvertent error and therefore, the nature of error which is urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner can only be rectified by taking appropriate steps against the judgment and order impugned in this review petition. Page No.# 4/4

¶7Therefore, the petitioner shall take an appropriate call in connection with the order impugned in this review petition as may be so advised. As the Court has arrived at a finding that it was not an inadvertent typographical error which has crept in the order impugned, this review petition stands closed with liberty to the petitioner to take such appropriate measures as he may be so advised.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010224782023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Review.Pet./118/2023 SATYABAN TALUKDAR S/O LATE HEM CHANDRA TALUKDAR, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF PURAN BARKA SATRA, PO KHUDRA, DEMOW, UNDER RANGIA POLICE STATION, DIST KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY,GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE (DISASTER MANAGEMENT) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 06 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 6 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP AMINGAON GUWAHATI 78103 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P KATAKI Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM Linked Case : WP(C)/1964/2022 Page No.# 2/4 SATYABAN TALUKDAR S/O- LATE HEM CHANDRA TALUKDAR R/O- PURAN BARKA SATRA P.O- KHUDRA DEMOW P.S- RANGIA DIST- KAMRUP VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REP . BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM REVENUE (DISASTER MANAGEMENT) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP AMINGAON GUWAHATI ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR P KATAKI Advocate for : SC FINANCE appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA