Gauhati High Court
CRP/9/2026 of Nang Gao and Anr Vs Tajum Tapo and Anr on 29 March 2026
GAHC040002842026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : CRP/9/2026 Nang Gao and Anr Son of Late Durga Gao, resident of Sika Bamin Village, PO Oyan, PS Sille, East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh, Election Commissioner,
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC040002842026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
(ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : CRP/9/2026
Nang Gao and Anr
Son of Late Durga Gao, resident of Sika Bamin Village, PO Oyan, PS Sille, East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh, Election Commissioner, VIth Adi Students Union General Coreference cum Election Session 2025-28
2: Keten Tabang
Age:
Occupation :
Son of Late Tadik Tabang
resident of Yio Village
PO and PS Kaying
Siang District
Arunachal Pradesh
Returning Officer
VIth Adi Students Union General Coreference cum Election Session 2025-2
VERSUS
Tajum Tapo and Anr
Son of Shri Pindo Tapo, a permanent resident of Mechuka, PO and PS Mechuka, Shi Yomi District, Arunachal Pradesh.
2:Nyape Rinya
Age: 0
Occupation :
Son of Shri Tanya Rinya
a permanent resident of Mechuka
PO and PS Mechuka
Shi Yomi District
Arunachal Pradesh
Advocate for the Petitioner : Adam Tatak, H Rahman,Parswajyoti Das Nair,Tadar Tayum,Tukrin Ligu,Goyi Taba Raju,Tonni Gammi,Tanur Gao,Amy Talom Advocate for the Respondent : Mepe Ete, Kamin Teri,Tony Meto,Nyali Sora
Page No.# 2/2
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG
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 : 30.03.2026 Mr. A. Tatak, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the aggrieved person has already preferred an appeal before the learned Civil Court against the impugned order dated 09.02.2026. In view of the above, Mr. Tatak, learned counsel for the petitioners prays that he may be allowed to withdraw this civil revision petition with liberty to approach the appropriate Court, if so advised. The prayer, not being objected to by Mr. D. Mazumdar, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents, is allowed. Accordingly, the civil revision petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed for.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant