Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/143/2026 of M/s M B Enterprises Vs The State of AP and 2 Ors on 5 October 2026
GAHC040004652026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/143/2026 M/s M B Enterprises a proprietorship firm having its registered office at Village Wada Bagang, PO and PS Chayang Tajo, East Kameng District, Arunachal
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Page No.# 1/2 GAHC040004652026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/143/2026 M/s M B Enterprises a proprietorship firm having its registered office at Village Wada Bagang, PO and PS Chayang Tajo, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh 790102, represented by tis proprietor Shri Moik Bagang, Son of Late Nikam Bagang, Village Wada Bagang, PO and PS Chayang Tajo, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh, through its power of attorney holder Shri Chatung Bagang, Son of Late Doni Bagang, resident of Vilalge Wada Bagang, PO and PS Chayang Tao, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh.
VERSUS The State of AP and 2 Ors represented by the Chief Secretary, Itanagar, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh. 2:The Chief Engineer Age: 0 Occupation : RWD Itanagar Govt of Arunachal Pradesh. 3:The Executive Engineer Age: 0 Occupation : RWD Chayang Tajo Division East Kameng District Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Advocate for the Petitioner : Bedanta Kaushik, Takar Bagang,Pankaj Borah,Nabam Kakum Advocate for the Respondent : Gimi Tarak, GA (AP),SC (RWD)
Page No.# 2/2 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO O R D E R 06.10.2026 Mr. Takar Bagang, learned counsel engaged by the petitioner submits that he has instructions to withdraw the writ petition since the petitioner no longer wishes to press the matter. Ms. K. Wangmo, learned Junior Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No.1 submits that she has no objection to the prayer. In view of above, the writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant