SYED HABIBUR RAHMAN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K.K. Phukan, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner. I have also heard Mr. D. Nath, learned Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) The writ petitioner herein had retired from service as In-Charge, District Fisheries Development Officer (DFDO) w.e.f. 31/12/2013. Aggrieved by the fact that the respondents did not consider his case for promotion to the post of District Fisheries Development Officer on regular basis, the petitioner has approached this Court, by filing the instant writ petition, for the second time seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider his case for promotion.

(3.) Ordinarily this Court would be reluctant in entertaining a writ petition filed by an employee after his retirement, seeking the relief as prayed for. However, having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to examine the matter.