Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010260222022 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/759/2022 RAJAT SHANTI PLAZA HOUSING SOCIETY A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1860, REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS SECRETARY NAMELY SRI PRADEEP KUMAR AGARWALA, ADDRESS- RAJAT SHANTI PLAZA, GROUND FLOOR, B.R. PHOOKAN ROAD, KUMARPARA, GUWAHATI-09, DIST. KAMRUP(M), ASSAM VERSUS MN DAHAL COMMISSIONER, GAUHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, ADDRESS- OFFICE OF THE GAUHATI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, RIVERFRONT, BEHIND SBI, PANBAZAR, GUWAHATI, PIN- 781001, DIST. KAMRUP(M), ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S CHAMARIA, MR A N SARMAH,MR. D DAS,MR M M ZAMAN Advocate for the Respondent : MR. S BORA, MR. D SAIKIA Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 10.02 .2025 Heard Mr. A.N. Sarmah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. Bora, learned counsel for the sole respondent. This contempt petition has been filed alleging willful disobedience of the direction contained in the order dated 31.10.2022 passed in WP(C) No.6884 of 2022 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner was disposed of directing the respondent Commissioner, GMC to give an opportunity of hearing to the respondent No.3 therein and upon completion of the hearing appropriate order be passed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Pursuant thereto, notice has been issued in the matter. Mr. S. Bora, learned counsel appearing for the sole respondent has placed before this Court a notice dated 22.02.2023 issued by the Commissioner’s Office to the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.3 in WP(C) No. 6884 of 2022. Pursuant thereto, notice has been issued and the hearing was conducted and on 01.03.2023 an order was passed by which the respondent No.3 in the writ petition namely Maa Kamakhya Builder had agreed to demolish the unauthorized construction in the premises of the present writ petitioner. Mr. S. Bora, learned counsel for the sole respondent therefore, submits that the direction contained in the order dated 31.10.2022 passed in WP(C) No.6884 of 2022 has been complied with. The learned counsel for the petitioner also does not dispute the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents. Taking into consideration the submissions made by the respective counsels, this Court is of the view that although notices were issued and Page No.# 3/3 considering the directions contained in the writ petition has been complied with, the contempt proceedings need not be proceeded with any further. Accordingly, the contempt petition stands closed. Notices issued stand recalled. Copies of the instructions placed before this Court by the learned Standing Counsel for the GMC are kept with the case record. JUDGE Comparing Assistant