Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5582 (GAU)

SAHIDUL ALAM CHOUDHURY AND 2 ORS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS

WP(C)/177/2025 · 2025-06-26

Sanjay Kumar Medhi

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010005622025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/177/2025 SAHIDUL ALAM CHOUDHURY AND 2 ORS S/O LATE SAJ UDDIN CHOUDHURY, R/O VILL- UTTARKANCHANPUR, P.O.- JANAKI BAZAR, DIST- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM 2: SAHIDUL HOQUE MAZUMDER S/O LATE SAFIJ UDDIN MAZUMDER R/O VILL- UTTARKANCHANPUR P.O.-JANAKI BAZAR DIST- HAILAKANDI ASSAM 3: ANAM UDDIN MAZUMDER S/O TAFAZZUL ALI MAZUMDER R/O VILL- UTTARKANCHANPUR P.O.-JANAKI BAZAR DIST- HAILAKANDI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6 2:THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ELECTION COMMISSIONER ADITYA TOWER 2ND FLOOR DOWN TOWN G.S. ROAD DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 Page No.# 2/3 3:THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 4:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PANJABARI JURIPAR GUWAHATI-37 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER HAILAKANDI P.O. AND DIST-HAILAKANDI ASSAM 6:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER HAILAKANDI ZILLA PARISHAD P.O. AND DIST- HAILAKANDI ASSAM 7:THE ELECTION OFFICER OF DISTRICT HAILAKANDI P.O. AND DIST- HAILAKANDI ASSAM 8:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER HAILAKANDI DEVELOPMENT BLOCK P.O. AND DIST- HAILAKANDI ASSAM 9:THE SECRETARY UTTAR KANCHANPUR GAON PANCHAYAT P.O.-JANAKI BAZAR DIST- HAILAKANDI ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J M A CHOUDHURY, MR. A B T HAQUE Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P AND R.D., SC, ELECTION COMMISSION.,GA, ASSAM Page No.# 3/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI ORDER 27.06.2025 Shri J.M.A. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that after filing of the writ petition, there are certain developments for which the writ petition has become infructuous. Also heard Shri S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, P&RD Department, Shri R. Dubey, learned Standing Counsel, State Election Commission and Ms. M. Barman, learned State Counsel. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. JUDGE Comparing Assistant