Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4598 (GAU)

M/s A T Enterprise v. The State of AP and 5 Ors

WP(C)/227/2025 · 2025-05-28

N Unni Krishnan Nair

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC040008302025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/227/2025 M/s A T Enterprise represented by proprietor Shri Abu Takam, Son of Late Takam Kani, resident of Village Pinte, Mengio, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS The State of AP and 5 Ors represented by the Secretary, Rural Development, Itanagar, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar. 2:The Joint Director Age: 0 Occupation : Rural Development Department Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar. 3:The Deputy Commissioner Age: 0 Occupation : Yupia Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 4:The Block Development Officer Age: 0 Occupation : Mengio CD Block PO Mengio Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 5:The Secretary North East Council Age: 0 Page No.# 2/3 Occupation : Ministry of Development of North Est Region NE Secretariat Shillong Shillong 793003 Meghalaya 6:The I/ C Deputy Advisor IFC and WSM) Age: 0 Occupation : Ministry of Development of North East Region NE Secretariat Shillong Govt of India Nongrim Hills Shillong 793003 Meghalay Advocate for the Petitioner : Dilip Saikia, Toko Rini Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), SC (RD),Binter Picha BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 29-05-2025 Heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Picha, learned Standing Counsel for the Rural Development Department and Ms P. Pangu, learned Government Advocate for the State respondent. After attempting to argue the matter at some length, Mr. D. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner, in view of the observations made by this Court vide order dated 07.05.2025 in WP(C) No. 170(AP)/2025, submits that he be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to re-file the same, if fresh cause of action arises. Page No.# 3/3 The prayer is not objected to by the learned counsel for the respondents. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed on withdrawal with liberty, as prayed for. JUDGE Comparing Assistant