Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010106822016 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/720/2016 MADRASSA HIFZUL QURAN MONIRCHAR, ESTB. 10/12/2000, REP. BY ITS HEAD MUDARIS/MOHTAMIM, NAMELY SHAMSUZZUHA, S/O ELIAS ALI, VILL. MONIRCHAR, P.O. SARKARERGAON, P.S. SOUTH SALMARA, DIST- DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN- 783127 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, EDUCATION SECONDARY DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6 2:THE DIRECTOR OF MADRASSA EDUCATION AND SECY. OF STATE MADRASSA BOARD ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY-19 3:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY-19 4:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS DHUBRI DISTRICT CIRCLE DHUBRI P.O.and DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783301 5:THE DY. COMMISSIONER DHUBRI Page No.# 2/3 ASSAM PIN-783301 6:CHAR TAKIMARI KHARIJIA QOUAMI MADARRIS VILL. CHAR TAKIMARI P.O. HAZIRHAT DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783128 7:NEW T.B. KHARIJI QOUAMI MADRASSA REP. BY ITS HEAD MOHTAMIM/MUDARRIS VILL. NEW TAKIMARI P.O. HAZIRHAT DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783128 8:ASADIA GIRLS KHARIZIA MADRASSA REP. BY ITS HEAD MOHTAMIM/MUDARRIS VILL. CHIRAKUTI BAZAR P.O. CHIRAKUTI DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-783330 9:NUR NABI ISLAMIA MADRASSA REP. BY ITS HEAD MOHTAMIM/MUDARRIS VILL. NATINER ALGA P.O. SOUTH SALMARA DIST- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN-78312 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M R KHANDAKAR, MR. A RAHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SECONDARY EDUCATION, GA, ASSAM Page No.# 3/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 13-06-2025 Heard Shri M. R. Khandakar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri U. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Secondary Education Department. The matter involves a claim for financial assistance under a scheme by the petitioner Madrassa. The petitioner has challenged an order dated 10.06.2015 whereby such claim was rejected. The learned counsel has however submitted that in the meantime, sufficient development has taken place including closure of Madrassas which have been brought under the Secondary Education Department. He, accordingly, submits that there may not exist any live cause of action. That apart, this Court has noticed that service upon respondent nos. 6, 7 & 9 are also not complete and this case is pending since 2016. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that no live cause of action exist for adjudication in this case and accordingly, the same is closed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant