Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21929 (GAU)

DWIPJYOTI PATOWARY v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS

MC/87/2024 · 2025-03-20

Suman Shyam

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010269432024 2025:GAU-AS:3079 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : MC/87/2024 DWIPJYOTI PATOWARY S/O LATE RANJIT PATOWARY RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 4, SARTHEBARI TOWN, PO AND PS SARTHEBARI, MOUZA SARUKHETRI, DIST BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE PERSONAL DEPARTMENT (B) , GOVT. OF ASSAM 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME (A) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 06 3:THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE GOVT. OF ASSAM 4:THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE GUWAHATI KAMRUP M ASSAM 5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B K DAS, Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 Linked Case : WP(C)/1315/2021 DWIPJYOTI PATOWARY S/O LATE RANJIT PATOWARY RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 4 SARTHEBARI TOWN PO AND PS SARTHEBARI MOUZA SARUKHETRI DIST BARPETA ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE PERSONAL DEPARTMENT (B) GOVT. OF ASSAM 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME (A) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 06 3:THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE GOVT. OF ASSAM 4:THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE GUWAHATI KAMRUP M ASSAM 5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP M ------------ Advocate for : MR. B K DAS Advocate for : GA ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS Page No.# 3/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM ORDER Date : 21.03.2025 Heard Mr. B.K. Das, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. C.K.S. Baruah, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondents. This misc. case has been filed with a prayer for setting aside the order dated 18.11.2024, passed in WP(C) No. 1315/2021, by means of which, the writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution. I have perused the grounds stated in the misc. case. It appears that due to some medical reasons, the petitioner’s counsel could not appear on 18.11.2024, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition. Mr. Baruah submits that he has not filed any objection in the misc. case and therefore, would not have any objection if the prayer is allowed. In view of the above and considering the submissions made at the bar, the order dated 18.11.2024 is hereby recalled. Consequently, the writ petition stands restored to its original file. This misc. case stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant