MOTAHER ALI PRODHANI AND ANR. v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.
WP(C)/461/2024 · 2025-09-16
Kardak Ete
Writ Petition (Civil)body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 6633 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 6633 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010018852024
2025:GAU-AS:12754
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/461/2024 MOTAHER ALI PRODHANI AND ANR.
S/O LATE MONSER ALI PRODHANI, VILL.- MADHUSOULMARI PT- I, P.O.- MODHUSOULMARI, DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM.
2: SHAHANUR ALAM PRODHANI S/O LATE JOYNAL ABEDIN
VILL.- MADHUSOULMARI PT- I P.O.- MODHUSOULMARI DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS.
REP. BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, COOPERATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 6.
2:THE REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ASSAM KHANAPARA GUWAHATI- 22.
3:THE ADDL. REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES KOKRAJHAR P.O. AND DIST.- KOKRAJHAR ASSAM PIN- 783370.
4:THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES DHUBRI P.O. AND DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3 PIN- 783301.
5:THE DISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES DHUBRI P.O. AND DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783301.
6:THE RETURNING OFFICER/ ONE MAN COMMITTEE MADHUSOULMARI SAMABAI SAMITY LTD. GOURIPUR DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783331.
7:THE SECRETARY MADHUSOULMARI SAMABAI SAMITY LTD. GOURIPUR DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783331 Advocate for the Petitioner : DR. B AHMED, MR M HUSSAIN,MR. A K AZAD Advocate for the Respondent : SC, CO OP,
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 17-09-2025 None appears for the petitioners on call. Ms. L. Ezung, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. G. Bordoloi, learned Standing Counsel, Cooperation Department for respondent Nos. 1 to 6, submits that no copy of the writ petition has been served on the respondent Nos. 1 to 6. Office Note dated 10.09.2025 indicates that despite granting several opportunities, the petitioners have failed to take steps for service of notice upon
Page No.# 3/3 respondent No. 7. Having considered above, the petitioners appear to be not interested to pursue the matter any longer. Accordingly, writ petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant