Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010115252025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3032/2025 VIVIK CYLINDERS PRIVATE LIMITED A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT ABHOYPUR, COLLEGE NAGAR, NORTH GUWAHATI-31, REPRESENTED BY ONE OF ITS DIRECTORS SRI RUPAK MAHANTA, C/O SRI R. P. MAHANTA, R/O ABHOYPUR, COLLEGE NAGAR, NORTH GUWAHATI-31, DIST- KAMRUP, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, DISPUR GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER ASSAM PUBLIC WORKS (ROADS) DEPATMENT CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-3. 3:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BRAHMAPUTRA BRIDGE PWRD CONSTRUCTION DIVISION FATASIL AMBARI GUWAHATI-25 DIST- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM 4:THE PROJECT MANAGER S.P. SINGLA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED NEW BRAHMAPUTRA BRIDGE PROJECT ABHOYPUR Page No.# 2/3 NORTH GUWAHATI IN FRONT OF NORTH GUWAHATI POLICE STATION NORTH GUWAHATI-781031 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KAMRUP AMINGAON DIST- KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-78103 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P K ROYCHOUDHURY, MR. N HAQUE,MR. N G KUNDU,MR. A K AZAD Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR. D NATH, SC, PWD,SC, PWD ROAD BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 25-07-2025 Heard Mr. A.K. Azad, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Nayak, learned Addl. AG, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 as well as Mr. D. Nath, learned Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the State respondent No. 5. The petitioner in the present proceeding had raised a grievance with regard to the excavation/ digging activities carried out by the PWD authorities just in front of the entrance of the house of the petitioner thereby preventing ingress and egress to his house. Mr. Nath, on instruction, submitted that the digging activities were required to be carried out so as to prevent water logging in the area. However, after the remedial measures were so taken to prevent water logging, the dugout portion has again been Page No.# 3/3 filled up and presently there is no obstruction for ingress and egress from the residence of the petitioner. Accordingly he submits that the grievance raised in the present petition stands redressed. Mr. A.K. Azad, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instruction, submitted that the respondent authorities have undertaken the remedial measures and the ingress and egress to his house is not being obstructed at present. In view of the above submission made by the learned counsel for the parties, no further live issue arises for consideration in the present proceeding. Accordingly, this writ petition stands closed. The instructions received by Mr. Nath and furnished by him before this Court today is kept on record and marked as ‘X’. JUDGE Comparing Assistant