Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010082272026 2026:GAU-AS:6063 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2321/2026 M/S MAHALAXMI TEA ESTATE PVT. LTD. (FORMERLY MAHALAXMI TEA ESTATE FACTORY, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM), REP. BY SRI DHIRAJ BORAH (MANAGER) HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT NAHORBARI BAGAN GAON, FALLANGANI GAON PANCHAYAT, MARANGI MOUZA, DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN- 785702. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 2:THE TEA BOARD OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY CHAIRMAN AND REGISTERING AUHTORITY TEA BOARD OF INDIA HEAD OFFICE-14 BIPLABI TRAILOKYA MAHARAJ SARANI KOLKATA-700001. 3:THE CONTROLLER OF LICENSING TEA BOARD OF INDIA HEAD OFFICE- 14 BIPABI TRAILOKYA MAHARAJ SARANI KOLKATA-700001. 4:THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TEA BOARD OF INDIA NORTH EASTERN ZONAL OFFICE HOUSEFED COMPLEX CENTRAL BLOCK 5TH AND 6TH FLOOR Page No.# 2/3 DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. GK Deka Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. K Gogoi, CGC B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER 04.05.2026 Heard Mr. GK Deka, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 2. The petitioner herein has assailed the show cause notice dated 13.04.2026 issued by the Deputy Chairman, Tea Board & Registering Authority, whereby the petitioner has been asked to show cause as to why the Registering Authority should not suspend or cancel his registration in violation of the provisions of the Tea Act, 1953 as well as the Tea (Marketing) Control Order, 2003 (for short, ‘the Order of 2003’). 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner fairly submitted that taking into account that the petitioner had already submitted the reply, the petitioner would not like to pursue the present proceedings without prejudice to the petitioner in such show cause proceedings. 4. This Court has heard Mr. K Gogoi, the learned CGC, who also submitted Page No.# 3/3 that not only the petitioner has opportunities before the Authority who had issued the show cause, but also there is an appellate remedy available under paragraph 24 of the Order of 2003. 5. Taking into account the above, this Court, therefore, closes the instant writ petition. 6. It is observed that closure of the instant writ petition shall not prejudice the petitioner in the said show cause proceedings and or to initiate appropriate actions, if so aggrieved by any such order passed in the said show cause proceedings. JUDGE Comparing Assistant