Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010230142016 2026:GAU-AS:5418 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4642/2016 DURGESWAR BORAH S/O- LT. MITHARAM BORAH, R/O, P.O. and P.S.- GAURISAGAR, DIST.- SIVASAGAR, ASSAM, PIN- 785640. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA and 16 ORS THROUGH THE SECY., MINISTRY OF SURFACE TRANSPORT, NEW DELHI- 110001. 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECY. TRANSPORT ROAD DIVISION DISPUR GHY- 6. 3:THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY AUTHORIZED BY THE CENRAL GOVT. CUM ADDITIONAL DY. COMMISSIONER R SIVASAGAR P.O. and P.S.- SIVASAGAR PIN- 785640. 4:THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN SIVASAGAR THE LOCAL OFFICE IS SITUATED NEAR SAMPRITI HOSPITAL A.T. ROAD SIVASAGAR PIN- 785640. 5:THE CIRCLE OFFICER Page No.# 2/3 SIVASAGAR REVENUE CIRCLE P.O. P.S. and DIST.- SIVASAGAR PIN- 785640. 6:KATIRAM BORAH S/O- LT. MITHARAM BORAH 7:CHIDANANDA BORAH 8:JOGEN BORAH 9:HEMANTA BORAH 10:PARAG BORAH 11:MOHANANDA BORAH RESPONDENT NO. 8 TO 12 ARE SONS OF LT. JADAV CHANDRA BORAH. 12:AJIT BORAH 13:PRAJIT BORAH RESPONDENT NO. 13 AND 14 ARE SONS OF LT. CHANDRA KANTA BORAH 14:PUSPA BORAH W/O- LT. RATNESWAR BORAH 15:SIMANTA BORAH S/O- LT. RATNESWAR BORAH 16:SAMIRAN BORAH S/O- LT. RATNESWAR BORAH 17:BANDITA BORAH D/O- LT. RATNESWAR BORAH RESPONDENT NO. 7 TO 18 ARE R/O P.O. and P.S.- GAURISAGAR DIST.- SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN- 785640 Page No.# 3/3 Advocate for the petitioner(s): None appears Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. HK Sarma For respondent Nos.6-17 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER 20.04.2026 None appears on behalf of the petitioner on call. 2. Mr. HK Sarma, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.6 to 17. 3. It is also seen that the petitioner has also not taken steps for service of notice upon the respondent No.4, inspite of various directions being passed by this Court as well as by the Lawazima Court. 4. Considering the above, it, therefore, appears that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the instant proceedings, for which, the writ petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. 5. Be that as it may, before parting with the records, this Court, however, observes that the dismissal of the writ petition shall not preclude the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority in terms with Section 3(H)4 of the National Highways Act, 1956, claiming compensation, if so advised. JUDGE Comparing Assistant