SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

MRIDUPABAN CHOUDHURY – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS – Respondent


Advocates:
['R K AGARWALA', '', 'D KALITA', 'A CHOUDHURY', 'H BETALA', 'GA', 'ASSAM', '', 'S CHAMARIA', 'SC', 'FCSCA']

O R D E R

15.03.2021 Heard Mr. R.K. Agarwala, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. N. Goswami, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents.

2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities for re-evaluation of the answer scripts of the written test dated 28.12.2008, conducted for selection and appointment to the post of Sub-Inspector of Food, Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs Department, Government of Assam. 3. It is projected that on 04.06.2012, the petitioner had submitted an RTI application, seeking disclosure of his marks and that in the first week of August, 2012, the request was refund vide RTI reply dated 07.06.2012, the respondent authorities had verbally informed the petitioner that as the matter was sub-judice before this Court, the desired information could not be given. It is projected that the copy of the RTI application dated 04.07.2012 had been misplaced. Later on, pursuant to RTI application dated 04.08.2017, vide reply dated 26.12.2017, the petitioner was informed about the marks obtained by him in the written and viva voce test. Thereafter

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top