Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010229452025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3369/2025 ANVESH KUMAR GOYAL SON OF JADOO RAM GOYAL RESIDENT OF CHATTA STREET VILLAGE GANGOH HOUSE NO 48 PS AND DISTRICT SAHARANPUR UTTAR PRADESH VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM REVENUE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER COLLECTOR KAMRUP METROPOLITAN DISTRICT GUWAHATI 4:THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER LAND SALE BRANCH KAMRUP METROPOLITAN DISTRICT GUWAHATI 5:THE CIRCLE OFFICER GUWAHATI CIRCLE KAMRUP METROPOLITAN DISTRICT GUWAHATI 6:THE SR SUB REGISTRAR KAMRUP METROPOLITAN DISTRICT GUWAHATI 7:SRI MAYUR TALUKDAR SON OF NARFENDRA NATH TALUKDAR RESIDENT OF 124 MOTHER TERESA PATH HATIGARH CHARIALI KARBI PATH GUWAHATI 21 KAMRUP METRO ASSAM 8:SRI ANURAG AGARWAL Page No.# 2/3 SON OF LATE SADHU RAM AGARWAL RESIDENT OF RAMNAGAR ROORKEE DISTRICT HARIDWAR UTTARAKHAND PRESENTLY POSTED AS JOINT SECRETARY SECURITY PARLIAMEN Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A CHOUDHURY, MR. AMIT GOYAL Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 24-11-2025 Heard Mr. P. Saraogi, learned counsel for the applicant/writ petitioner. Also heard Ms. G. Hazarika, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Mr. J. Handique, learned counsel for the respondents No. 3, 4, 5 and 6. By filing this application, the applicant has prayed for impleadment of one Sri Anurag Agarwal in the connected WP(C) 1579/2018 as respondent No.8. The applicant/writ petitioner has filed the connected writ petition challenging the order dated 15.12.2015 issued by the Deputy Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Revenue & Disaster Management Department and the order of Circle Officer, Guwahati Revenue Circle, whereby, the name of the petitioner has been deleted in respect of a joint property standing in the name of the petitioner and Sri Anurag Agarwal, who is sought to be impleaded in the connected writ petition. Learned counsel appearing for all the respondents have no objection in impleading Sri Anurag Agarwal as party respondent No.8. Having considered that Sri Anurag Agarwal is a co-purchaser and co-owner of the land in question and the prayer for impleadment not being opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent, I am of the considered view that Sri Anurag Agarwal appears to be a necessary party in the aforesaid writ petition and therefore, Sri Anurag Agarwal is allowed to be impleaded as respondent No.8 in the connected writ petition. Page No.# 3/3 The I.A. stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant