Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/295/2026 of Mori Riba Vs The State of AP and 3 Ors on 19 July 2026
GAHC040009912026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/295/2026 Mori Riba Son of Late Tamo Riba, resident of Village Pagi, PO and PS Basar, Leparada District, Arunachal Pradesh. 791101 VERSUS The State of AP and 3
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC040009912026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
(ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : WP(C)/295/2026
Mori Riba
Son of Late Tamo Riba, resident of Village Pagi, PO and PS Basar, Leparada District, Arunachal Pradesh. 791101
VERSUS
The State of AP and 3 Ors
represented by the Chief Secretary, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh 791111 2:The Principal Secretary Age: 0
Occupation :
Department of Environment
Forest and Climate Change
Govt of Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar
Papum Pare District
Arunachal Pradesh 791111
3:The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest and Head of Forest Force Age: 0
Occupation :
Environment
Forest and Climate Change
Govt of Arunachal Pradesh Itanagar
Papum Pare District
Arunachal Pradesh 791111
4:The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests Age: 0
Occupation :
Wildlife and Biodiversity and Chief Wildlife Warden Itanagar Page No.# 2/2
Advocate for the Petitioner : H A Laskar, S B Laskar 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. S. B. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner. After arguing the matter at some length, Mr. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that he may be allowed to withdraw this writ petition, having realized that the writ petition is not maintainable against the initiation of departmental proceedings. He, therefore, prays for withdrawal of the writ petition. Prayer for withdrawal is accepted. Mr. R. H. Nabam, learned Additional Advocate General for the State, is present. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed on withdrawal.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant