BHARATIYA CHA MAZDOOR SANGHA TINGRAI SAKHA v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS
WP(C)/2252/2026 · 2026-05-21
Manish Choudhury
Writ Petition (Civil)body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6457 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6457 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No. 1/2 GAHC010082392026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2252/2026 BHARATIYA CHA MAZDOOR SANGHA TINGRAI SAKHA REGISTRATION NO. 642, KHATUJAN TEA ESTATE, DISTRICT- TINSUKIA (ASSAM) AND REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT RAJ PATNAYAK ALIAS RAJ NAYAK, AGE 38 YEARS, S/O KUNDAN NAYAK, R/O SUKAN PUKHURI TEA ESTATE, P.O.- SUKAN PUKHURI, DIST.- TINSUKIA, ASSAM. PIN- 786146 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 06 2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER TINSUKIA P.O.- TINSUKIA DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN- 786125 3:THE CIRCLE OFFICER TINSUKIA REVENUE CIRCLE P.O TINSUKIA DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM. PIN- 786125 4:THE ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER TINSUKIA P.O.- TINSUKIA DIST.- TINSUKIA ASSAM. PIN- 786125 5:SRI RAJEN DUTTA S/O LATE
Page No. 2/2 ITHARAM DUTTA RESIDENT OF FEEDER ROAD PARBATIA TINSUKIA TOWN P.O. P.S AND DIST- TINSUKIA ASSAM. PIN- 786125 6:SRI RAJ KUMAR MITTAL S/O LATE MAHABIR PRASAD RESIDENT OF JALAN GALI TINSUKIA TOWN P.O. P.S AND DIST TINSUKIA ASSAM. PIN- 78612 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S ISLAM, MR A HAWARI,A R MONDAL Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, REVENUE
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 22.05.2026
Heard Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. A. Bhattacharyya, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for the respondent no. 1; and Mr. S.S. Roy, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 2 – 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner regarding the cause espoused in this writ petition at some length, the learned counsel for the petitioner has sought to withdraw the writ petition in order to avail appropriate remedy before appropriate forum. In view of the above submission made by Mr. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed on withdrawal.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant