Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2019 DAILYLAW 1487 (GAU)

HABIZA BEGUM @ HABIZA KHATOON v. THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS.

WP(C)/5706/2019 · 2026-05-10

Pranjal Das, Sanjay Kumar Medhi

Writ Petition (Civil)body2019

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010183322019 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5706/2019 HABIZA BEGUM @ HABIZA KHATOON W/O- MD. JAMALUDDIN, R/O- VILL- KUMARGAON, P.S. RUPOHIHAT, DIST- NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS. REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME DEPTT., NEW DELHI 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT. DISPUR GHY-6 ASSAM 3:THE DY. COMMISSIONER NAGAON P.O. NAGAON NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782002 4:THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER ASSAM NEW SECY. BUILDING DISPUR GHY-6 ASSAM 5:THE STATE COORDINATOR Page No.# 2/3 NATION REGISTER OF CITIZEN ACHYUT PLAZA G.S.ROAD BHANGAGARH GHY-5 ASSAM 6:SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782002 7:THE MEMBER FOREIGNERS TRIBUNAL 3RD NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 78200 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K MAZUMDAR, Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I., SC, ELECTION COMMISSION.,SC, NRC,SC, F.T BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANJAL DAS ORDER 11.05.2026 (S. K. Medhi, J) None appears for the petitioner on call whereas Ms. A. Verma, learned Standing Counsel, Home Department; Shri G. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, NRC; Shri N. Kalita, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Shri A. I. Ali, Standing Counsel, ECI; Shri P. Sarma, learned State Counsel and Shri S. S. Roy, learned CGC are present. There has been continuous non representation on behalf of the petitioner on 18.01.2021 and 20.04.2026. In fact vide the said order dated 20.04.2026, the following observation was made:- “4. It is made clear that if the petitioner remains absent or unrepresented on Page No.# 3/3 the next date of listing, adverse orders shall follow.” In view of the above, it is clear that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed for non-prosecution. Records be sent back. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant