Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2022 DAILYLAW 1576 (GAU)

HABIBUR RAHAMAN AND 3 ORS. v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.

WP(C)/4824/2022 · 2026-05-24

Anjan Moni Kalita

Writ Petition (Civil)body2022

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010145632022 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4824/2022 HABIBUR RAHAMAN AND 3 ORS. S/O TAHUR ALI, VILL.- NO.4 BARUAJHAR, P.O.- BECHIMARI, P.S.- DALGAON, DIST.- DARRANG (ASSAM), PIN- 784514. 2: AHMMED HUSSAIN S/O LT. MUKTAR HUSSAIN VILL.- NO. 3 CHIKANMATI P.S.- DALGAON P.O.- BECHIMARI PIN- 784514. 3: OMAR ALI S/O LT. OSMAN GONI VILL. AND P.O.- BECHIMARI P.S.- DALGAON PIN- 784514. 4: AKKAS ALI S/O NASOR ALI VILL. AND P.O.- BECHIMARI P.S.- DALGAON PIN- 784514 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. REP. BY THE COMMISSONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 6. 2:THE JOINT SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 6. 3:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER DARRANG ZILLA PARISHAD DARRANG MANGALDOI P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDOI DIST.- DARRANG ASSAM. 4:THE CHAIRMAN DARRANG ZILLA PARISHAD DARRANG MANGALDOI P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDOI DIST.- DARRANG ASSAM PIN- 784115. 5:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER BECHIMARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDOI DIST.- DARRANG ASSAM PIN- 784115. 6:THE PRESIDENT BECHIMARI ANCHALIK PANCHAYAT P.O. AND P.S.- MANGALDOI DIST.- DARRANG ASSAM PIN- 784115 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A SARMA, MR. LENTSO,MR. S CHOWDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P AND R.D., BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 25.05.2026 Page No.# 3/3 Heard Mr. Lentso, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Ms P. Thapa, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the respondents No.1, 2, 3 and 5. Mr. Lentso, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the instant case has become infructuous due to lapse of time. In view of the aforesaid, the instant petition is closed as infructuous. JUDGE Comparing Assistant