Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010222362018 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6947/2018 BABULAL GOENKA S/O LATE KAMAKHYALAL GOENKA R/O SAPATGRAM, DIST. DHUBRI VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS. REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM , DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GUWAHATI - 781003. 2:THE DIRECTOR TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI - 781006. 3:DEPUTY DIRECTOR TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING DISTRICT OFFICE- DHUBRI ASSAM. 4:SAPATGRAM TOWN COMMITTEE REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND CEO P.O. SAPATGRAM DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN - 783337. Page No.# 2/3 5:THE DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ASSAM MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DISPUR. 6:THE SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICE (CIVIL) BILASIPARA GAURANG NAGAR DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM PIN - 783348 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS M HAZARIKA, MS. S KHOUND Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR G UZIR (R4),MR. M SAIKIA (R4),MR. S M BARUAH (R4) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 28.04.2025 Heard Ms. M. Hazarika, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. B. Khan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. U. Das, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 & 6 and also heard Mr. M. Saikia, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 4. The grievance raised in the present proceeding pertains to the realization of fees for grant of building permission by the authorities of the respondent no. 4 Town Committee, in violation of the provision of Assam notified Urban Areas (other than Guwahati) Building Rules, 2014. This Court, vide order dated 03.10.2018, while issuing notice in the matter had directed that the authorities of the respondent no. 4 would only realize fees from the petitioner for granting building permission in terms of the said Rules of Page No.# 3/3 2014. Today, when the matter is taken up, Mr. Saikia, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 has submitted that the authorities of the respondent no. 4 had granted the building permission to the petitioner after realization of the fee in terms of the provisions of the said Rules of 2014; and further, that they would not be demanding any further higher fee from the petitioner for the same purpose. In view of the above submission of Mr. Saikia, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 4, the grievance of the petitioner herein, stands redressed and no further order would be called for in this connection. In view of the above, accepting the submission made by Mr. M. Saikia, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4, the present writ petition stand disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant