Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/3982/2025 of MD ABDUL BARI Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS on 1 September 2026
GAHC010196182025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3982/2025 MD ABDUL BARI S/O LT FOIJAL HOQUE VILL KATLAMARI PS LAKHIPUR DIST GOALPARA ASSAM PIN 783330 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER AND
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010196182025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3982/2025
MD ABDUL BARI
S/O LT FOIJAL HOQUE VILL KATLAMARI PS LAKHIPUR DIST GOALPARA
ASSAM PIN 783330
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS
REP BY ITS COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY PANCHAYAT AND RURAL
DEVOPMENT DEPTT DISPUR GUWAHATI 6
2:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
GOALPARA
PO GOALPARA PIN 783101 DIST GOALPARA ASSAM
3:THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
JALESWAR DEVELOPMENT BLOCK LAKHIPUR PO AND PS LAKHIPUR DIST
GOALPARA ASSAM
4:THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
JALESWAR DEVELOPMENT BLOCK LAKHIPUR PO AND PS LAKHIPUR DIST
GOALPARA ASSAM
5:THE SECRETARY
KHALICHABHITA GAON PANCHAYAT PO KHALICHABHITA PIN 783330 DIST
GOALPARA ASSAM
------------
Advocate for : MR. T R SARMA
Advocate for : SC
P AND R.D. appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS
Page No.# 2/2
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
02.09. 2026 Heard Mr. T.R. Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel for the P and R.D. Department.
2. It is the common submission of the learned counsel that the writ petition has become infructuous by lapse of time, and since a fresh tender has been floated.
3. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed as infructuous.
4. The petitioner would be at liberty to exercise their legal rights, if any remain, by filing appropriate applications. JUDGE Comparing Assistant