RANJUMA BEGUM AND 3 ORS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
WP(C)/6083/2023 · 2026-07-16
Devashis Baruah
Writ Petition (Civil)body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9632 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 9632 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010226102023
2026:GAU-AS:9852
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6083/2023 RANJUMA BEGUM AND 3 ORS WIFE OF LATE HASMAT ALI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE/ TOWN- AZARA HATKHUWAPARA, P.O. AND P.S.- AZARA, GUWAHATI, PIN- 781030, IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP, ASSAM.
2: AMON ALI SON OF LATE HASMAT ALI
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE/ TOWN- AZARA HATKHUWAPARA
P.O. AND P.S.- AZARA GUWAHATI
PIN- 781030 IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP
ASSAM.
3: MD. SUMAN ALI SON OF LATE HASMAT ALI
RESIDENT OF VILLAGE/ TOWN- AZARA HATKHUWAPARA
P.O. AND P.S.- AZARA GUWAHATI
PIN- 781030 IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP
ASSAM.
4: MD. ABED ALI
Page No.# 2/3 SON OF LATE MD. MOFIJ ALI
RESIDENT OF VILL/ TOWN- MIKIRPARA
DHARAPUR GUWAHATI PIN- 781039
IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER/ SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, BLOCK-F, 1ST FLOOR, ASSAM SECRETARIAT (CIVIL), DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006.
2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KAMRUP METRO LICHUBAGAN HENGRABARI GUWAHATI- 781036
IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP(M) ASSAM.
3:THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KAMRUP METRO LICHUBAGAN HENGRABARI GUWAHATI- 781036
IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP(M) ASSAM.
4:THE CIRCLE OFFICER AZARA REVENUE CIRCLE AZARA GUWAHATI- 781017
IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP(M) ASSAM
Page No.# 3/3
Advocate for the petitioner(s): None appears
Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. SR Baruah, Govt. Advocate
B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER 17.07.2026
None appears on behalf of the petitioners on call.
2. Mr. SR Baruah, the learned Govt. Advocate, Assam who appears on behalf of the respondents.
3. It is seen that this is the third time the petitioners have chosen not to appear before the Court.
4. Considering the above, it appears that the petitioners have lost interest in the present proceedings, for which, the writ petition stands dismissed for non- prosecution.
5. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant