SYED SAZIDUR ROHMAN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. SB Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Chetia, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby, petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the orders dated 29.01.2011 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition) and 30.12.2013 (Annexure-10 to the writ petition).

(3.) By the first order dated 29.01.2011, petitioner's appointment as Nazir, in the office of the Superintendent of Taxes (Recovery), Golaghat, was cancelled and by the second order dated 30.12.2013, it has been held that it is not possible to relax the existing rules to accommodate the claim of the petitioner.