Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2021 DAILYLAW 887 (GAU)

BIRENDRA SHARMA v. THE UNION OF INDIA AND 8 ORS

WP(C)/970/2021 · 2026-05-03

Kardak Ete

Writ Petition (Civil)body2021

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010025982021 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/970/2021 BIRENDRA SHARMA S/O. LT. KRISHNA MURARI SHARMA, PERMANENT R/O. BALIJAN, BORJAN MOUZA, DIST. KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM, TEMPORARY RESIDENCE- CARE OF HEALTH CARE MEDICINE, PLAZA POINT, CHURCH ROAD, DIMAPUR SADAR, DIMAPUR, NAGALAND-787112. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 8 ORS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, GOVT. OF INDIA, NEW DELHI, PIN-110001. 2:THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. A PUBLI SECTOR UNDERTAKING BELONGING TO GOVT. OF INDIA SITUATED AT 3RD FLOOR PTI BUILDING 4 PARLIAMENT STREET NEW DELHI-110001 REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. 3:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE DEPTT. OF HILL AREAS GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006. 4:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE MEMBER KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU Page No.# 2/3 KARBI ANGLONG PIN-782461. 5:THE EXECUTIVE MEMBER DEPTT. OF REVENUE KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU PIN-782461. 6:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU PIN-782461. 7:THE JOINT SECRETARY TO THE DEPTT. OF REVENUE KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG PIN-782461. 8:THE ASSTT. SETTLEMENT OFFICER KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG PIN-782461. 9:THE ASSTT. REVENUE OFFICER KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIPHU PIN-782461. 10:KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. K JAIN, Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I., SC, NHAI,SC, K A A C Page No.# 3/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 04.05.2026 None appears for the petitioner on call. Heard Mr. R.K. Talukdar, learned counsel for respondent No.2. It is noticed that the petitioner was granted 7 (seven) days time to take steps for service of notice upon respondent No.5, however no steps have been taken and the petitioner thereafter remains unrepresented. In view of the above, it appears that the petitioner is no longer interested to pursue this matter. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed for non prosecution. JUDGE Comparing Assistant