Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 5316 (GAU)

SRI PRANJAL KONWAR v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHRS

WP(C)/2194/2026 · 2026-05-03

N Unni Krishnan Nair

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010079242026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2194/2026 SRI PRANJAL KONWAR SON OF LATE PRONOB KONWAR, RESIDENT OF DURGESWAR PHUKAN PATH, SEPON DERDIGHAT, P.O. SEPON, DISTRICT-CHARAIDEO, ASSAM, PIN-785673. 2: SRI PADMA GOGOI DAUGHTER OF LATE DEHIRAM GOGOI RESIDENT OF SEPON BAZAR P.O. SEPON DISTRICT-DIBRUGARH ASSAM PIN-785673. 3: SMTI ANIMA GOGOI WIFE OF JAGAT GOGOI RESIDENT OF DOLOBARI KACHARI P.O. PEOLIPHUKON NAZIRA P.S. GELEKI DISTRICT SIVSAGAR PIN-785685. 4: SRI PRABHAT KONWAR SON OF MUKHESWAR KONWAR RESIDENT OF DIHAJAN P.S. DEMOW DISTRICT SIBSAGAR ASSAM PIN-785662. 5: SRI NRIPEN CHETIA RESIDENT OF GELAKEY BAM GAON P.S. GELAKEY P.O. GELAKEY Page No.# 2/6 DISTRICT SIBSAGAR ASSAM PIN785696. 6: PRASSANNA GOGOI C/O NARENDRA NATH GOGOI RESIDENT OF BOKATA KHANIKAR P.O. KHAMUN P.S. NEMUGURI DISTRICT SIBSAGAR PIN785640 7: NILIMA PHUKON C/O LATE BUDHESWAR PHUKON RESIDENT OF BOKOTA JAPIHAJIYA P.S. NEMUGAS DISTRICT CHARAIDEO PIN 785673. 8: DEBAPROSAD PHUKON C/O BUDDHESWAR PHUKON RESIDENT OF LAI PELENG P.S. MOZANHAT DISTRICT SIBSAGAR PIN 785673 9: SAHERA BEGUM C/O INAMUL HUSSAIN RESIDENT OF NAPHUK P.S. SONARI DIST DISTRICT CHARAIDEO PIN785689. 10: ANUPAM SARMA C/O LT. MAHENDRA SARMA RESIDENT OF JATAKIYA GAON P.S. NAZIRA DIST. SIBSAGAR PIN 785666 11: PRATIBHA PHUKON C/O KESHAB PHUKON RESIDENT OF BORBHUYAN HATI BARUA P.S. MORANHAT DISTRICT SIBSAGAR PIN 785673. 12: IRA BURAGOHAIN C/O NABA KANTA CHETIA Page No.# 3/6 RESIDENT OF HAHCHARA MANIPURI GAON P.S. SIBSAGAR DISTRICT SIBSAGAR PIN 785701. 13: TULTUL CHETIA DOWARAH C/O PULIN DOWARAH RESIDENT OF WARD NO. -10 BY LANE-6 OLD AMULAPATTY P.S. SIBSAGER DISTRICT SIBSAGAR ASSAM PIN 785640 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHRS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006. 2:THE UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM EDUCATION DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 3:THE DIRECTOR OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI- 19. 4:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS SIVASAGAR DISTRICT CIRCLE SIVASAGAR ASSAM PIN 785628. 5:THE HEAD MASTER DESANG RAJABARI HIGH SCHOOL P.O-DESANG GHAT DISTRICT. SIBSAGAR ASSAM PIN 785672. 6:THE HEAD MASTER BAKHARBENGENA HIGH SCHOOL P.O-BAKHARBENGENA DIST-SIBSAGAR ASSAM Page No.# 4/6 PIN 785674. 7:THE HEAD MASTER SEPON HIGH SCHOOL P.O-SEPON DIST- SIBSAGAR ASSAM PIN 785673. 8:THE HEADMASTER HAHCHARA GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL P.O-NAGAGAON DISTSIBSAGAR ASSAM PIN 785701. 9:THE PRINCIPAL DEMOW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL P.O-DEMOW DISTRICT SIBSAGAR DISTRICT ASSAM PIN 785662. 10:THE HEADMASTER PATSAKU HIGH SCHOOL P.O-PATSAKU DIST- SIBSAGAR ASSAM PIN 785673. 11:THE HEADMASTER DAPANI HIGH SCHOOL P.O-DAPANI DIST-SIBSAGAR ASSAM PIN 785684. 7 12:THE HEADMASTER GELAKEY HIGH SCHOOL P.O-GELAKEY DIST-SIBSAGAR ASSAM PIN 785696. 13:THE HEAD MASTER LAKWA TANTIA HIGH SCHOOL P.O- LAKWA DIST-SIBSAGAR Page No.# 5/6 ASSAM PIN 785688 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S S S RAHMAN, MS. P MAHERSI,MR. S S A RAHMAN Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SEC. EDU., BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER 04/05/2026 Heard Mr. S S S Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. D Mushahary, learned Standing counsel, Secondary Education Department, appearing for the respondents. 2. Ms. Mushahary, learned Standing counsel, Secondary Education Department has raised a preliminary objection that the petitioners in the present writ petition have resorted to misrepresentation with regard to the cases filed before this Court. In this connection, she has referred to paragraph-11, 12, 13 & 14 of the writ petition. 3. Mr. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioners has very fairly submitted that the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the respondents is correct. However, he begs apology for the inadvertent projections made in the writ petition. 4. Considering the fact that the petitioners even with regard to the cases filed by them before this Court earlier have also misrepresented the facts, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case, wherein, the extra Page No.# 6/6 ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, which is equitable in nature, would be called to be exercised. 5. At this stage, Mr. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioners prays that he be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition without liberty to re-file the same by the same petitioners. 6. Prayer accepted. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed on withdrawal, without any liberty being granted to the petitioners to re-file the same. JUDGE Comparing Assistant