THE ELECTED PRESIDENT, KATARIHARA GAON PANCHAYAT, NAMELY, REJAUL KORIM MOLLAH v. ABDUL MOZID AND ANR
Cont.Cas(C)/196/2026 · 2026-04-05
Devashis Baruah
Writ Petition (Civil)body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4409 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4409 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010067232026
2026:GAU-AS:5060
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/196/2026 THE ELECTED PRESIDENT, KATARIHARA GAON PANCHAYAT, NAMELY, REJAUL KORIM MOLLAH SON OF SHORIFUL ISLAM MOLLAH, VILL- BODOUDMARI, P.O- KATARIHARA, P.S- LAKHIPUR, DISTRICT- GOALPARA, PIN- 783132, ASSAM. VERSUS ABDUL MOZID AND ANR SON OF LATE ROSTOM ALI, RESIDENT OF VILL- DAMRIBHASA, P.O.- KATARIHARA, P.S- LAKHIPUR, DISTRICT- GOALPARA, PIN- 783132, ASSAM.
2:ODUT MOLLAH @ ABDUL WADUD MOLLAH SON OF LATE ROMZAN MOLLAH RESIDENT OF VILL- DAMRIBHASA P.O.- KATARIHARA P.S- LAKHIPUR DISTRICT- GOALPARA PIN-783132 ASSAM Advocate for the petitioner(s): Ms. N Rajmedhi
Advocate for the respondent(s):
B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
ORDER 06.04.2026
Page No.# 2/2
This is an application filed alleging willful and deliberate violation to the
order dated 16.03.2026 passed in WP(C)No.872/2026.
2. It is relevant to take note of that the petitioner herein is the respondent No.9 in WP(C)No.872/2026.
3. The grievance of the petitioner herein is that in violation to the order passed by this Court on 16.03.2026, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 herein are running the market.
4. This Court had duly perused the order dated 16.03.2026 and from a perusal of the said order, it reflects that the parties were directed to maintain status-quo as regards the operation of the cattle market. There was no direction that the respondents herein who were the petitioners in WP(C)No.872/2026 cannot run the cattle market.
5. Considering the above, it is the opinion of this Court that no case has been made out for issuance of notice in the instant proceedings.
6. Accordingly, the instant contempt proceedings seeking initiation of contempt proceedings stands rejected.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant