Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010096812026 2026:GAU-AS:7213 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2690/2026 ANAM UDDIN BARBHUIYA S/O LATE BASHIR UDDIN BARBHUIYA, R/O OF RANGAUTI PT-1, P.S. AND DISTRICT- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN- 788155 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF ROAD, TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, TRANSPORT BHAWAN-1, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI-1 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM REVENUE (SETTLEMENT) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 06 3:THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (P) PMU/SILCHAR NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED PMU PESKAR LANE SONAI ROAD KANANKPUR PT-I SILCHAR- 788006 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER HAILAKANDI PIN- 788151 5:THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER CUM ADDL. DISTRICT COMMISSIONER HAILAKANDI PIN- 788151 Page No.# 2/2 6:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD BUILDING DIVISION CACHAR SILCHA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A Y CHOUDHURY, MR. T A CHOUDHURY,MR. AHMAD SAKIR Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. G PEGU(C.G.C.),GA, ASSAM,SC, NH DEPARTMENT,SC, PWD,SC, REVENUE BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER 25.05.2026 Heard Mr. A.Y. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. G. Pegu, learned Central Government Counsel [CGC] for the respondent no. 1; Mr. A. Bhattacharya, learned Standing Counsel, Revenue Department for the respondent no. 2; Ms. B. Nandini, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. R.K. Talukdar, learned Standing Counsel, NHICDL for the respondent no. 3; Mr. N. Das, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 4 & 5; and Mr. P. Nayak, learned Standing Counsel, PWD for the respondent no. 6. After making submissions at some length, Mr. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition to file it afresh with better particulars. The said submission made by Mr. Choudhury has not been opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is dismissed on withdrawal, with liberty to file it afresh with better particulars. JUDGE Comparing Assistant