Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/2053/2018 of RAMAVTAR MANIHAR Vs THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY AND 9 ORS. on 15 September 2026
GAHC010065972018 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/2053/2018 RAMAVTAR MANIHAR S/O. AMARCHAND MANIHAR, R/O. MARWARI PATTY, A.T. ROAD, NAGAON, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY AND 9 ORS. DEPTT.
GAHC010065972018
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2053/2018
RAMAVTAR MANIHAR
S/O. AMARCHAND MANIHAR, R/O. MARWARI PATTY, A.T. ROAD, NAGAON, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY AND 9 ORS.
DEPTT. OF HOME, DISPUR, GHY.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY P.P. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM.
3:OFFICER IN CHARGE
TEZPUR POLICE STATION
TEZPUR
DIST. SONITPUR.
4:SUSHIL SIPANI
S/O. LT. J.L. SIPANI
R/O. C-191
VIVEK VIHAR
DELHI.
5:MOTILAL SIPANI
S/O. LT. J.L. SIPANI
R/O. HARIPATTY
P.O. TEZPUR
DIST. SONITPUR
ASSAM.
6:BHARAT
S/O. YUDHIR SINGH
R/O. 200B
DDA FLATS HILMIL
NEW DELHI
7:R S SINGH
KHORA COLONY
GHAZIABAD
UTTAR PRADESH
8:DINESH CHANDRA
NOTARAY PUBLIC DELHI
MEMBERSHIP NO. 776.
9:GOPAL CHETRY
S/O. BIRKHA BAHADUR CHETRY
VILL. GUTTONG
P.O. KALIA BHOMARA
TEZPUR
DIST. SONITPUR.
10:UMESH DAS
S/O. LT. G.R. DAS
CHANDARIMARI
TEZPUR
DIST. SONITPU
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B K DAS, Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR. S K SINGH (R4 & 5),MR B PUSHILAL (R4 & 5)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
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 : 16.09.2026 Heard Mr. B. K. Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M. Barman, learned Counsel appearing for the State respondent. Mr. B. K. Das, learned counsel, submits that the petitioner does not wish to press the instant writ petition any longer and accordingly, seeks withdrawal of the same. In view of the aforesaid endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition stands dismissed on being withdrawn. JUDGE Comparing Assistant