Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010126682025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Review.Pet./186/2025 THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, WATER RESOURCES DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI, ASSAM 781006 2: THE CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCES DEPTT. CHANDMARI GUWAHATI 03 ASSAM. 3: THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEERING NAGAON AND MORIGAON WATER RESOURCE CIRCLE RKB ROAD HAIBARGAON DIST. NAGAON ASSAM 782001 4: THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MORIGAON WATER RESOURCE DIVISION MORIGAON ASSAM 78210 VERSUS BADAN CHANDRA NATH S/O LATE LALITNATH, R/O VILL. GASPARA CHAPARMUKH, P.O. CHAPARMUKH, P.S. RAHA, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM 782425 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR R M DAS, SC, WATER RESOURCE Page No.# 2/4 Advocate for the Respondent : , Linked Case : WP(C)/6205/2021 BADAN CHANDRA NATH S/O LATE LALIT NATH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE GASPARA CHAPARMUKH PO CHAPARMUKH PS RAHA DIST NAGAON ASSAM 782425 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT CHANDMARI GUWAHATI 781003 3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEERING NAGAON AND MORIGAON WATER RESOURCE CIRCLE R K B ROAD HAIBARGAON DIST NAGAON ASSAM 782001 4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MORIGAON WATER RESOURCE DIVISION MORIGAON ASSAM Page No.# 3/4 782105 ------------ Advocate for : MR. T DEURI Advocate for : SC. WATER RESOURCE DEPTT. appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 13.08.2025 Heard Mr. R. M. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The present review application has been filed praying for review of the common Judgment and Order dated 27.09.2022, passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C).No.4734/2021 and other analogous matters. 3. Similar review petitions, assailing the judgment and order dated 27.09.2022, passed in WP(C).No.7833/2018 and other analogous matters was also a subject matter of challenge in Review Petition No.137/2025. 4. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on consideration of the matter was pleased to dismiss the said review petition vide order dated 30.07.2025. The conclusions drawn by the co-ordinate Bench in the order dated 30.07.2025, passed in Review Petition No.137/2025, being relevant is extracted hereinbelow: “5. Be that as it may, this Court finds that by the order dated 27.09.2022 direction was also issued to the Ministry of Jal Shakti to release the amount due under the scheme. The Ministry of Jal Shakti was duly represented by Mr. R. K. Dev Choudhury, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India but no objection was raised by the learned counsel for the respondents on the ground of nonjoinder of necessary party. Moreover, the said Ministry has also not sought any review of the order. 6. It was for the petitioners to implead the Ministry of Jal Shakti and if they had failed to do so resulting in a situation where the order dated Page No.# 4/4 27.09.2022 cannot be implemented on technical grounds, even then, it would be for the writ petitioners to face the consequences. The same cannot, however, be a ground for this Court to review/ recall the order dated 27.09.2022, which was passed by this Court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties including the Deputy Solicitor General of India representing the Ministry of Jal Shakti in the Union of India as well as the Brahmaputra Board. 7. For the reasons stated herein above, this Court does not find any good ground to review the order dated 27.09.2022.” 5. This Court is in respectful agreement with the conclusions reached by the Co-ordinate Bench vide Judgment and Order dated 30.07.2025 in Review Petition No.137/2025. The issue arising in the present proceeding being similar to the one arising in Review Petition No.137/2025, the decision as arrived at therein, would squarely apply to the present Review Petition. 6. Accordingly, in view of the conclusions drawn above, the present Review Petition is held to be devoid of merit and the same consequently stands dismissed. However there would be no order as to costs. JUDGE Comparing Assistant