Gauhati High Court
Cont.Cas(C)/31/2026 of Hage Mima Vs R K Joshi on 19 July 2026
GAHC040010752026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/31/2026 Hage Mima Son of Late Hage Tago, presently residing at Naniya's Abode, Legislative Assembly Road, ESS Sector, Itanagar, Papum Pare District,
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC040010752026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
(ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/31/2026
Hage Mima
Son of Late Hage Tago, presently residing at Naniya's Abode, Legislative Assembly Road, ESS Sector, Itanagar, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh.
VERSUS
R K Joshi
The Chairman, Arunachal Pradesh State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Office at OT Building, 2nd Floor, Niti Vihar Market, TT Marg, Niti Vihar, Itanagar 791111
Advocate for the Petitioner : Tate Tatak, T Tatin,K Gao,Karmu Chotton Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE
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.
ORDER
Date : 20.07.2026 Heard Mr. K. Gao, learned counsel for the petitioner. This petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience and violation of the order of this Court dated 20.05.2026, passed in WP(C)496/2025, whereby this Court directed the respondents to issue a fresh appointment order to the petitioner with effect from 27.08.2025.
Page No.# 2/2 A perusal of the appointment order dated 22.06.2026 reflects that the petitioner has been appointed, although after nearly a month, as Secretary on a contractual basis in the Arunachal Pradesh State Electricity Regulatory Commission for a period of two years, which is in accordance with the direction of this Court. Thus, there is no wilful disobedience and violation of the order of this Court and no contempt has been committed by the respondent. Accordingly, the contempt petition stands dismissed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant