Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Smti Kalpana Baruah vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors on 13 May, 2019

Author: A. S. Bopanna

Bench: A. S. Bopanna, Arup Kumar Goswami

                                                                   Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010182282018




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

                                   Case No. : WA 285/2018

            1:SMTI KALPANA BARUAH
            W/O LATE PANKAJ CHANGKAKATI, R/O K.P.M. CHARIALI, NEAR THE AILA
            GAS AGENCY ROAD, P.O. AND P.S. SIVSAGAR, SIBSAGAR 785640

            VERSUS

            1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
            REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF
            ASSAM, EDUCATION (SECONDARY) DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006


            2:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
            ASSAM
             KAHILIPARA
             GUWAHATI 781019

            3:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS
             SIVSAGAR CIRCLE
             SIVSAGAR
            ASSAM
             PIN 785640

            4:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
             FINANCE DEPTT.
             DISPUR
             GUWAHATI -0

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. S K BARKATAKI

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU.
                                                                               Page No.# 2/2


                                         BEFORE
                    HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. A. S. BOPANNA
                     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI

                                         ORDER

13.05.2019:

(A. S. Bopanna, CJ) Heard Mr. D. K. Nath, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. S. K. Ghosh, learned Standing Counsel, Education (Secondary) Department for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
Taking note of the nature of the contention put forth, the appeal requires detailed consideration. Hence, admit.
The pendency of this appeal shall not be treated as an impediment by the respondents for implementation of the benefit granted by the learned Single Judge through order dated 31.05.2018 and the benefit thereof received by the appellant would be without prejudice to the contention urged in this appeal.
                                JUDGE                          CHIEF JUSTICE




Comparing Assistant