Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/215/2025 of Tata Motors Limited Vs The State of AP and 3 Ors on 22 June 2026
GAHC040007562025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/215/2025 Tata Motors Limited represented by Shri Tuhin Chatterjee, having its office at 4th Floor, Ahura Center, 82, Mahakali, 82, Mahakali, Caves Road, MIDC,
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC040007562025
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
(ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : WP(C)/215/2025
Tata Motors Limited
represented by Shri Tuhin Chatterjee, having its office at 4th Floor, Ahura Center, 82, Mahakali, 82, Mahakali, Caves Road, MIDC, Andheri (East) Mumbai 400093
VERSUS
The State of AP and 3 Ors
through the Chief Secretary, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar.
2:Dulley Pai
Age: 0
Occupation :
Son of Dulley Tadu
resident of Village Michi
Ziro
PO and PS Ziro
Lower Subansiri District
Arunachal Pradesh.
3:Glorious Motors Pvt Ltd
Age: 0
Occupation :
Having its registered office at Pattan No.122 and 124
NH 52
Kamalabaria
Haitlung
Roanapur
North Lakhimpur 787031
4:Tarh Motors LLP
Age: 0
Occupation :
having its registered office near Inter State Truck Terminalm Lekhi Village Page No.# 2/2
Naharlagun
Papum Pare District
Arunachal Pradesh 79111
Advocate for the Petitioner : H K Jamoh, Eddie Payeng Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP), Tai Dool,Sumit Chhetri 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 : 23-06-2026
Mr. M. Ete, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. H. K. Jamoh, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the writ petition has become infructuous. Mr. P. Pangu, learned Government Advocate for respondent No. 1, and Mr. S. Chetri, learned counsel for respondent No. 2, are present. Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed, as infructuous.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant