Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010027112019 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/881/2019 DEBOJYOTI DEKARAJA AND 6 ORS. S/O LATE NANDA RAM DEKARAJA, HOJAI ASEB OFFICER COLONY, P.O. AND DIST.- HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN- 782435. 2: RITU BORO S/O CHAKRADHAR BORO NORTH VIDYANAGAR P.O. AND DIST.- HOJAI ASSAM PIN- 782435. 3: PINTU NATH S/O LATE PUSHPA NATH VILL. AND P.O. SINGARI BASTI DIST.- HOJAI PIN- 782435. 4: UTPAL KUMAR AICH S/O LATE HIRALAL AICH VILL- DOBOKA SUTARGAON P.O. AND P.S. DOBAKA DIST.- HOJAI PIN- 782435. 5: APU DAS S/O LATE MODAN MOHAN DAS VILL.- SAUTHAL BASTI JUGIGAN P.O. AND DIST.- HOJAI PIN- 782435. 6: AMIR HUSSAIN S/O NASSIR UDDIN Page No.# 2/3 P.O. AMBARI VILL. GHONIRPAR DIST. HOJAI PIN- 782445. 7: ARJUN DAS S/O AMRIT DAS VILL. BHOWKA BASTI P.O. BORBAHA DIST.- HOJAI ASSAM. 782435. ( ALL THE PETITIONERS HAVE COMMON CAUSE OF ACTION) VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS. REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, POWER (ELECTRICITY) DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6. 2:THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (HRA) ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD. (APDCL) BIJULI BHAWAN PALTAN BAZAR GHY-1. 3:THE CHAIRMAN SELECTION COMMITTEE-B APDCL/AEGCL/APGCL BIJULI BHAWAN PALTAN BAZAR GUWAHATI-1. 4:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER NAGAON ELECTRICAL CIRCLE APDCL (CAR) NAGAON ASSAM- 782001. 5:THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER HOJAI ELECTRICAL DIVISION APDCL CAR HOJAI DIST.- HOJAI ASSAM- 782435 Page No.# 3/3 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. C S SARKAR, Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, APDCL BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM ORDER Date : 08-04-2025 None appears for the writ petitioners. Mr. B. Das, learned standing counsel, APDCL authorities is present. The primary relief prayed for in this writ petition was for issuance of a direction permitting the petitioners to appear in the written test to be held on 17-02-2019. Mr. Das submits that the written test has already been held during the pendency of this writ petition. Therefore, no live issue survives for adjudication in this case. After going through the statements made in the writ petition, I find myself in agreement with the submission of Mr. Das. In view of the above, this writ petition stands disposed of as infructuous. JUDGE GS Comparing Assistant