THE UNION OF INDIA Vs. GOVIND SINGH BATHYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the averments in writ appeal.

(2.) This writ appeal has been filed against judgment dated 23-5-2014, passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in WP(C) No. 195/2013, whereby the writ petition was allowed having been found to be squarely covered by the decision of the Gauhati High Court dated 29-8-2011, passed in WA. No. (SH) 33/2011, which attained finality in view of dismissal of the Special Leave Petition filed against judgment. That apart, the said judgment was complied with, and the petitioner, Govind Singh Bathyal, was reinstated in service. Moreover, while passing the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge has also given liberty to the appellants herein to start the proceedings afresh, if necessary.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants notwithstanding the compliance of the aforesaid judgment passed on similar facts and circumstances by the Gauhati High Court contends that the offence in the instant case was committed prior to enforcement of the new Act called 'the Assam Rifles Act, 2006 (for short the Act of 2006). Therefore, as provided under the earlier Act, a Commandant of the organization was competent to pass the dismissal order. It is also the submission of learned counsel for the appellants that this point was raised before learned Single Judge, but it did not find favour with the Court.