Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5179 (GAU)

RAMCHANDRA KONCH AND 4 ORS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS

WP(C)/7/2018 · 2025-05-29

Kaushik Goswami

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010000102018 2025:GAU-AS:7053 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/7/2018 RAMCHANDRA KONCH AND 4 ORS R/O-VILL-HARIMURA P.S. MORNOI 2: BALLAV DAS R/O- VILL- DUBAPARA P.S. MORNOI 3: RAHIMA KHATUN R/O- VILL- RAKSHAYASINI PART-I P.O. RAKSHAYASINI P.S. MORNOI 4: MALIKA KHATUN R/O-VILL- RAKSHAYASINI JUNGLE BLOCK P.O. BALADHMARI CHAR P.S. MORNOI 5: MAMUD ALI VILL- RAKSHAYASINI JUNGLE BLOCK P.O. BALADHMARI CHAR P.S. MORNO VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPTT. OF FOREST AND WILD LIFE, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM LAND REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPTT. DISPUR Page No.# 2/3 GHY-6 3:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER GOALPARA DIVISION 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GOALPARA 5:ASSAM STATE DISASTER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON DISPUR GHY-6 6:THE CIRCLE OFFICER MORNOI REVENUE CIRCLE 7:THE RANGE FOREST OFFICER GOALPARA FOREST RANG Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P N GOSWAMI, MR. R R Gogoi,MS. M D BORAH,MR. I KALITA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER 30.05.2025 None appears for the petitioners when the matter is called. Heard Mr. N. Goswami, learned counsel for the State respondents. This matter has been listed today with the remark “For Dismissal” in the cause list. It appears that on the last occasion i.e. 26.05.2025 despite the matter being called twice, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners and accordingly, the matter was listed today with the aforesaid remark. However, despite the matter being listed today with the aforesaid remark “For Dismissal”, reflecting the four names of the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners in the cause list, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners. Page No.# 3/3 That being so, the writ petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. Interim order accordingly stands vacated. JUDGE Comparing Assistant