Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010242282025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6513/2025 MARIAM BEGUM W/O LATE AFTAR UDDIN, VILL. TELITIKAR PART-II, P.O. RAJATILLA, P.S. KATIGORAH, DIST.- CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN-788805, MOBILE NO. 9401143651 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 8 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF ROAD, TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, TRANSPORT BHAWAN, 1, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI-110001. 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 3:THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA SECTOR-10 DWARKA NEW DELHI- 110075 4:THE CHAIRMAN NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT LTD. (NHIDCL) 3RD FLOOR PTI BUILDING 4 PARLIAMENT STREET NEW DELHI 01 5:THE GENERAL MANAGER (P) ASSAM AMBARI GUWAHATI-1 6:THE GENERAL MANAGER SILCHAR NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED (NHIDCL) PASKER LANE SONAI ROAD Page No.# 2/3 KANAKPUR PT.I SILCHAR- 788006 7:THE PROJECT DIRECTOR NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA (NHAI) CACHAR P.O. AND P.S. SILCHAR DIST.- CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 788006 8:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CACHAR SILCHAR PIN- 788001 9:THE CIRCLE OFFICER KATIGORAH REVENUE CIRCLE P.S. KATIGORAH DISTRICT- CACHAR ASSAM PIN- 78880 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N ISLAM, MS. L WAJEEDA,MR. T K DEY Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MS J SARMAH (C.G.C),SC, NHIDC,SC, REVENUE,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 02-09-2026 Heard Mr. T.K. Dey, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. R. Boro, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. C. Baruah, learned Standing Counsel, NHAI & NHIDCL for the respondent nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7; Mr. A. Bhattacharyya, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for the respondent no. 2; and Mr. H. Sarma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 8 – 10. Page No.# 3/3 Mr. Dey, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in so far as the relief sought for in this writ petition is concerned, the petitioner has received an amount of Rs. 36,77,866/-, which has been credited in the Bank Account of the petitioner. Since the petitioner’s grievance pleaded in this writ petition has been redressed, the petitioner does not want to pursue the present writ petition, with liberty to avail appropriate remedy in so far as some other grievances are concerned. In view of the above submission made by Mr. Dey, learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed, reserving the liberty to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy in the event there are some other grievances which are not raised in this writ petition. JUDGE Comparing Assistant