SHRI REWATHO v. THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 4 ORS
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of directing the
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. With the aforesaid observations and directions, writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Judgment
1:SHRI REWATHO S/O TSUOEKHU, W/C LABOUR (RETIRED), BEARING CODE NO.PHK.0673, UNDER SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PHED, MELURI SUB DIVISION, PHEK, NAGALAND VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 4 ORS THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF OF NAGALAND, NAGALAND, KOHIMA 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND PHED NAGALAND KOHIMA 3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PHED NAGALAND KOHIMA 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PHED PHEK DIVISION PHEK NAGALAND Page No.# 2/3 5:THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL NAGALAND KOHIMA Advocate for the Petitioner : SENTIYANGER : CHUBA IMCHEN : VESUTOLU THERIE Advocate for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: LUCY, GOVT ADV NL Advocate for the Respondent No. 5 : JOSHUA SHEQI BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L.S. JAMIR Date : 13-12-2022 ORDER Heard Mr. Sentiyanger, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Lucy, learned Senior Government Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4 and Mr. Joshua Sheqi, learned Standing Counsel, Accountant General for respondent No. 5.
The petitioner was appointed as Work-charged Skilled Labour on a fixed pay of Rs. 540/- by an Order dated 07.03.1983, issued by the Office of the Executive Engineer, PHE, Phek Division, Phek. Thereafter, petitioner on attaining the age of superannuation retired from service by an Office order dated 31.03.2018, w.e.f.
31.03.2018 issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, PHED, Meluri Sub- Division, Phek, Nagaland. The claim of the petitioner in the present writ petition is for regularization of his service purely for the purpose of getting pension and pensionary benefits. To that effect, petitioner also has made representations before the competent authorities, however, the said representations have also not been considered. Page No.# 3/3 At this stage, Mr. Sentiyanger, learned counsel for the
petitioner, submits that the petitioner may be permitted to file a fresh representation by annexing some judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. He, however, prays that as and when the petitioner files the representation, direction be issued to the respondents to consider and dispose of the same within a specific period of time.
Operative part
Recording the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the competent authority by annexing copies of the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court within a period of one week from today. Thereafter, the competent authority shall consider the same and dispose of the representation made by the petitioner by a speaking order and in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the representation.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of directing the
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gauhati High Court, on 13 Dec 2022. The bench was L S JAMIR.
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.