Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13924 (GAU)

SHRI MANJIT SAIKIA v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

WP(C)/7719/2016 · 2025-09-25

Kaushik Goswami

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010123862016 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/7719/2016 SHRI MANJIT SAIKIA S/O LT. GONESH SAIKIA, R/O BORUAH BARI GAON, P.O. MAHUT GAUN, PIN-785101, DIST- JORHAT, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, PHE DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6 2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER P.H.E. DEPTT. HENGERABARI GHY-6 3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PHE JORHAT CIRCLE DIST- JORHAT ASSAM 4:THE JUNIOR ENGINEER PHE DEPTT. JORHAT CIRCLE JORHAT ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.M BORA, MR.B B BORAH,MS.J CHETRY,MS L BARUA Advocate for the Respondent : , SC, P H E Page No.# 2/2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER 26.09.2025 No representation on behalf of the petitioner on call. It appears that since there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on the last two consecutive dates, i.e., 05.09.2025 and 22.09.2025, the instant writ petition was directed to be listed today with the remark ‘For Dismissal’. Despite the matter being listed today in the cause list with the remark ‘For Dismissal’ and the names of four counsels on behalf of the petitioner having been reflected in the cause list, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner on call. In view of the consecutive non-appearance of the petitioner, the instant writ petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. JUDGE Comparing Assistant