AHMED ALI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A. N. Ahmed, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P. Handique, learned standing counsel,appearing on behalf of respondents No. 1, 2 and 3; Ms. R. B. Borah, learned Government Advocate, Assam, appearing on behalf of respondents No. 4 and 5; and Mr. B. Sharma, learned standing counsel, Accountant General,Assam, appearing on behalf of respondent No. 6.

(2.) The present proceeding was instituted by Ahmed Ali @ Md. Ahmed Ali,inter alia, praying for being authorized, his pension and pensionary benefits on his retirement as a Tax Collector in Chapoi Gaon Panchayat. During the pendency of the present proceeding, the original petitioner i.e. Ahmed Ali @ Md. Ahmed Ali expired on 21/3/2021. Thereafter, his wife and son,namely, Jahura Khatun and Azizur Rahman, respectively, instituted an interlocutory application being IA(c)912/2022, praying for substituting themselves in place of the original petitioner in the present proceeding i.e. WP(c)252/2017. The substitution, as prayed for, in the said interlocutory application, was allowed by this Court vide order, dtd. 15/3/2024.However, it is seen that the names of the substituted petitioners have not been reflected in the Cause Title of the present writ petition. Accordingly, Registry is required to effect the necessary corrections in the Cause Title of the writ petition and also in the CIS, in terms of the directions passed by this Court vide order, dtd. 15/3/2024, in IA(c)912/2022, as well as the order, dtd. 15/3/2024, passed in the present proceeding.

(3.) Situated thus, the instant writ petition is being considered by reckoning Jahura Khatun and Azizur Rahman as the writ petitioners.