Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
In terms of above, this writ petition stands disposed of at the motion stage itself
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Accordingly, taking note of the submission of learned counsel for both the parties, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition at the motion stage itself by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation, enclosing all the relevant documents to the respondent…
- Para 77. In terms of above, this writ petition stands disposed of at the motion stage itself. Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Judgment
Advocate for the Petitioner : MD. A HUSSAIN, MR. T ISLAM,MR. K ALOM Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU., SC, FINANCE,SC, HEALTH BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER
17.09 .2025 Heard Mr. A. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. P. Das, learned standing counsel, Secondary Education Department, appearing for the respondent Nos.1—3, Ms. R.M. Barooah, learned standing counsel, Finance Department, appearing for the respondent No.5 and Mr. D. Upamanyu, learned standing counsel, Health Department, appearing for the respondent No.6.
#2. The petitioner herein is aggrieved for non-payment of a sum of Rs.3,30,749/-, being the admissible amount of medical reimbursement by the respondent No.2.
#3. Mr. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner, Late Hafizul Hoque was serving as Vocational Teacher at Government Boys' H.S. School, Dhubri and during the service period, her husband had undergone medical treatment at Hayat Hospital, Lalganesh, w.e.f. 25.08.2020 to 08.09.2020 and he died in harness on 16.09.2020 leaving behind the petitioner and two minor children. After his death, the petitioner had obtained next of kin certificate on 23.12.2020 and the petitioner has also been granted the family pension vide order dated 06.07.2022 and after her death, the petitioner has submitted one representation claiming medical reimbursement, which after scrutiny by the respondent No.6 vide communication dated 10.05.2022 was Page No.# 3/3 allowed and accorded approval for a sum of Rs.3,30,749/- as admissible amount for medical reimbursement. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed one representation before the respondent No.2 enclosing all the relevant documents, but the same failed to evoke any response and the amount has not yet been paid to the petitioner.
#4. Ms. Das, learned standing counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that the writ petition may be disposed of by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation to the Director of Secondary Education enclosing all the relevant documents. Mr. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner then submits that this petition may be disposed of at this motion stage itself by directing the respondent No.2, the Director of Secondary Education to dispose of the representation to be filed by the petitioner in a time bound manner.
#5. Accordingly, taking note of the submission of learned counsel for both the parties, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition at the motion stage itself by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation, enclosing all the relevant documents to the respondent No.2 and on such representation being filed by the petitioner, the respondent No.2 shall dispose of the same within a period of 2(two) months from the date of receipt of the representation.
#6. The petitioner shall obtain a certified copy of this order and place the same before the respondent No.2 along with the representation and relevant documents.
#7. In terms of above, this writ petition stands disposed of at the motion stage itself. Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.