ARMAAN KUMAR MAHATO v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS
WP(C)/4895/2024 · 2025-04-27
Manish Choudhury
Writ Petition (Civil)body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 18633 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 18633 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010197392024
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4895/2024 ARMAAN KUMAR MAHATO S/O- PAWAN KUMAR MAHATO, RESIDENT OF SHIVAM NAGAR, WARD NO.
13, CHAPAGURI ROAD, P.O. AND P.S. BONGAIGAON, DIST.- BONGAIGAON (ASSAM) (THE PETITIONER BEING MINOR IS BEING REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER PAWAN KUMAR MAHATO) VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06 2:THE ASSAM BACKWARD CLASSES COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON NILOMONI PHUKAN PATH SREE NAGAR ASSAM GUWAHATI- 781006 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BONGAIGAON ASSAM PIN- 78338 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. R CHOUDHURY, MS F N ZAMAN,MS. B. HAZARIKA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT
Page No.# 2/2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 28.04.2025
Mr. C. Sharma, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. R.M. Das, learned Standing Counsel, Social Justice and Empowerment for the respondent nos. 1 & 2 and Mr. N. Das, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam has appeared for the respondent no. 3 are present. Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the writ petition had been preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved by non-issuance of OBC Caste Certificate to the petitioner by the respondent authorities. Ms. Choudhury has referred to the additional affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner on 23.04.2025 to submit that during the pendency of the writ petition, the respondent authorities, more particularly, the respondent no. 3 has issued a Caste Certificate in favour of the petitioner on 29.03.2025. Ms. Choudhury has, thus, submitted that in view of such subsequent development, the subject-matter of the writ petition has become infructuous. In view of the fact that the Caste Certificate has already been issued to the petitioner on 29.03.2025, there is no necessity to continue with the present writ petition. The writ petition is, therefore, closed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant