Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5565 (GAU)

FANINDER KUMAR RAI v. THE UNION OF INDIA and 5 ORS

I.A.(Civil)/306/2025 · 2025-02-13

Arun Dev Choudhury

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010004872025 2025:GAU-AS:1592 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/306/2025 FANINDER KUMAR RAI 24 YRS., S/O SRI RAM BILASH RAI, R/O DIHRI, P.O.DIHRI, P.S. RAJPUR, DIST- BUXAR, BIHAR, PIN-802114, VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA and 5 ORS REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-1 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CRPF CGO COMPLEX NEW DELHI-1 3:THE SPECIAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CRPF N.E. ZONE GHY-1 4:INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CRPF SHILLONG PIN-793001 5:DY. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CRPF KHATKHATI ASSAM PIN-782480 Page No.# 2/4 6:THE COMMANDANT 138 BN CRPF G.C. KHATKHATI ASSAM PIN-78248 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.H L MAURYA, MR.V N UPADHYAY,MR.A K SINGH Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., C.G.C.,MR.B DEKA Linked Case : WP(C)/3335/2016 FANINDER KUMAR RAI 24 YRS. S/O SRI RAM BILASH RAI R/O DIHRI P.O.DIHRI P.S. RAJPUR DIST- BUXAR BIHAR PIN-802114 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA and 5 ORS REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-1 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CRPF CGO COMPLEX NEW DELHI-1 3:THE SPECIAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CRPF N.E. ZONE GHY-1 Page No.# 3/4 4:INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CRPF SHILLONG PIN-793001 5:DY. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CRPF KHATKHATI ASSAM PIN-782480 6:THE COMMANDANT 138 BN CRPF G.C. KHATKHATI ASSAM PIN-782480 ------------ Advocate for : MR.H L MAURYA Advocate for : ASSTT.S.G.I. appearing for THE UNION OF INDIA and 5 ORS BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY O R D E R 14.02.2025 The present Interlocutory Application is filed for correction of a typographical mistake in the 3rd line of paragraph 2 of the writ petition by correcting the date as 08.04.2012 in place of 01.04.2012. The further prayer is to allow to replace the corresponding annexure i.e. the order dated 01.04.2012 and annex the order dated 08.04.2012. Such prayer is not opposed by the learned CGC. It is seen that such mistake is inadvertent. Accordingly, prayer stands allowed. The learned counsel for the petitioner is to furnish an amended writ petition after such correction before the Registry with an advance copy to the learned CGC. IA stands disposed of. Page No.# 4/4 Such amended petition be filed within a period of two weeks from today. JUDGE Comparing Assistant