Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14236 (GAU)

BINOD THAOSEN AND 4 ORS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS

WP(C)/4383/2022 · 2025-03-23

Suman Shyam

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010128462022 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4383/2022 BINOD THAOSEN AND 4 ORS S/O LATE BOJENDRA THAOSEN, R/O VILL-MAIBANG, P.O. AND P.S.- MAIBANG, DIST-DIMA HASAO, ASSAM, PIN-788831 2: HOLOM HAGJER S/O LATE CHANDRAMANI HAGJER R/O VILL-MAIBANG P.O. AND P.S.-MAIBANG DIST-DIMA HASAO ASSAM PIN-788831 3: RAJIB BATHARI D/O LATE THANGBONG BATHARI R/O VILL-MAIBANG P.O. AND P.S.-MAIBANG DIST-DIMA HASAO ASSAM PIN-788831 4: DEBANON PHONGLO S/O LATE NAICHORON PHONGLO R/O VILL-MAIBANG P.O. AND P.S.-MAIBANG DIST-DIMA HASAO ASSAM PIN-788831 5: MONDET LANGTHASA S/O THABUSING LANGTHASA R/O VILL-MAIBANG P.O. AND P.S.-MAIBANG DIST-DIMA HASAO ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 PIN-78883 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HILLS AREAS DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06 4:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM N.C. HILLS AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL DIMA HASAO HAFLONG ASSAM PIN-788819 5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER P.W.D. (R AND B) MAIBANG DIVISION MAIBANG DIST-DIMA HASAO ASSAM PIN-788831 6:THE TREASURY OFFICER HAFLONG DIST-DIMA HASAO ASSAM PIN-788819 7:THE TREASURY OFFICER MAIBANG SUB TREASURY MAIBANG DIST-DIMA HASAO ASSAM PIN-78883 Page No.# 3/3 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H TALUKDAR, B R BRAHMA,MR. R SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, N C HILLS,SC, FINANCE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM ORDER Date : 24-03-2025 Mr. H. Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the grievance of the writ petitioners have already been redressed by the authorities. Therefore, no live issue survives in this writ petition. Taking note of the submission of Mr. Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioners, this writ petition stands disposed of as infructuous. JUDGE GS Comparing Assistant