Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/6095/2025 of QUIPPO OIL AND GAS INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED Vs UNION OF INDIA and othrs on 8 September 2026
GAHC010238382025 2026:GAU-AS:13128 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6095/2025 QUIPPO OIL AND GAS INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE SITUATED
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010238382025
2026:GAU-AS:13128
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/6095/2025
QUIPPO OIL AND GAS INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES
ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE SITUATED AT 709, 7TH
FLOOR, MERLIN INFINITE, DN-51, SECTOR-V, SALT LAKE CITY, KOLKATA- 700091, REPRESENTED BY MR. RAHUL GUPTA, THE SENIOR MANAGER- LEGAL
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA and othrs
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY OF MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM
NATURAL GAS KARTAVYA BHAVAN-3, NEW DELHI-110115
2:OIL INDIA LIMTED
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN MANAGING DIRECTOR
P.O. DULIAJAN
DIST- DIBRUGARH
ASSAM
INDIA
PIN-786602
3:PETRONOVA ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED
THOUGH ITS DIRECTOR 52-B
NEWYORK TOWER-A
THALTEJ CHAR RASTA
THALTEJ ROAD
AHMEDABAD
AHMADABAD CITY
GUJARAT-380005
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P K BORA, MR S J SAIKIA,MR. N N DUTTA,DR. A SARAF
Page No.# 2/2
Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR H K SARMA(R3),MR D SENAPATI(R3),MS K
BHATTACHARYYA(R3),SC, OIL
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
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
09.09.2026 Heard Dr. A Saraf, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. N.N. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Senapati, learned counsel for respondent No. 3, Mr. K. Kalita, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and Mr. K. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for respondent No. 3. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that due to developments after filing of the writ petition, the writ petitioner presently is not interested in pursuing the present writ petition and the writ petition may be closed. The learned counsel for the respondents do not object to the same. Accordingly, the present writ petition is closed without adjudicating any of the issues raised in the writ petition and the same shall remain open for adjudication in appropriate proceedings. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant