Page No.# 1/2 GAHC020004402024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : WP(C)/153/2024 M/S TRIDENT ENTERPRISE REGD. NO. NPW/CLASS-I/158 KOHIMA REPRESENTED BY ITS ATTORNEY HOLDER SHRI TENUMEREN SON OF SHRI IMTY AO - P IMTY AP R/O LOWER AGRI COLONY, KOHIMA NAGALAND VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REPRESENTDE BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, RAIL BHAWAN RAISINA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001 2:THE GENERAL MANAGER (CONSTRUCTION) NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI-781011 ASSAM 3:THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER/CON N.F. RAILWAY DIMAPUR-797112 NAGALAND 4:THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER/CON N.F. RAILWAY KOHIMA 797001 5:THE STATE OF NAGALAND THROUIGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF NAGALAND 6:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOHIMA NAGALAN For the petitioner (s) : Mr. Sentiyanger, Advocate Page No.# 2/2 For the respondent (s) : Mr. Z. N. Ngullie, CGSC Mr. K. Angami, Advocate Mr. N. Angami, Advocate BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH O R D E R 08.04.2025 Mr. Sentiyanger, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that taking into account that the contract in question has been terminated, the proper remedy available to the petitioner would be by way of Arbitration, and as such, the petitioner would not therefore press the instant writ petition. 2. Taking into account the above, the instant writ petition stands closed on withdrawal. 3. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. 4. Before parting with the records, this Court however observes that withdrawal of the instant writ petition shall not prejudice the petitioner to avail remedies otherwise available in law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant