Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010269312025 2025:GAU-AS:17533 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/7227/2025 ALL ASSAM FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALERS ASSOCIATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SPOKESPERSON, SHRI GUNJAN KUMAR BORAH, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT DISPUR, GUWAHATI -781036 2: SHRI GUNJAN KUMAR BORAH SPOKESPERSON ALL ASSAM FAIR PRICE SHOP DEALERS ASSOCIATION RESIDENT OF LEJAI LAZAI GOAN DIBRUGARH ASSAM 786007 VERSUS UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION DEPARTMENT, KRISHI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI-11001. 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF FOOD CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS ASSAM SECRETARIATE DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 ASSAM. 3:THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FOOD CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS GOVT. OF ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 ASSAM SECRETARIATE DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 ASSAM. 4:THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF FOOD PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND LEGAL METROLOGY R.K. MISSION ROAD ULUBARI GUWAHATI - 781007 KAMRUP METRO ASSA For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. D. Das, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. P. Nayak, Addl. AG, Assam BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER Date : 17.12.2025 Heard Mr. D. Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners and Mr. P. Nayak, the learned Additional Advocate General, Assam appearing on behalf of all the Respondents. 2. Mr. P. Nayak, the learned Additional Advocate General, Assam submitted that the instant writ petition is pre-matured taking into account that the Petitioners have only challenged the impugned Minutes of the Meeting dated 06.09.2025. The learned Additional Advocate General further referring to the impugned Minutes of the Meeting dated 06.09.2025 drew the attention of this Court to the last paragraph of the said Minutes wherein it is mentioned that the proposal which have been mooted in the Minutes is yet to be approved by the competent authority Page No.# 3/3 and thereupon would be placed before the State Cabinet for further approval. He therefore submitted that the instant writ petition is pre- matured. 3. Mr. D. Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners submitted that taking into account the said submission made by the Additional Advocate General that no such decision has been taken to implement the proposal mooted in the Minutes of the Meeting dated 06.09.2025, the Petitioners would not like to press the instant writ petition however liberty may be given to the Petitioners to again approach this Court when the proposal is made effective. 4. Taking into account the above, the instant writ petition stands closed on withdrawal. 5. The closure of the instant writ petition however shall not prejudice or preclude the Petitioners to again approach this Court if the proposal so mooted out in the impugned Minutes of the Meeting dated 06.09.2025 is implemented. JUDGE Comparing Assistant