Gauhati High Court
Cont.Cas(C)/293/2025 of RIPIN GOYARI Vs ROHAN KUMAR JHA, IAS AND 6 ORS. on 23 August 2026
GAHC010116222025 2026:GAU-AS:12304 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/293/2025 RIPIN GOYARI S/O LATE DHELARAM GOYARI R/O VILL- BHAREGAON P.O. CHAPARBORI, P.S. BALAPARA MOUZA- PAKA, SARTHEBARI REVENUE CIRCLE, IN THE
GAHC010116222025
2026:GAU-AS:12304
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/293/2025
RIPIN GOYARI
S/O LATE DHELARAM GOYARI
R/O VILL- BHAREGAON
P.O. CHAPARBORI,
P.S. BALAPARA
MOUZA- PAKA, SARTHEBARI REVENUE CIRCLE, IN THE DISTRICT OF
BARPETA, ASSAM
VERSUS
ROHAN KUMAR JHA, IAS AND 6 ORS.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BARPETA, P.O. AND P.S. BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN-781301
2:SRI KAUSTAV KALITA (ACS)
ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (REVENUE)
BARPETA
P.O. AND P.S. BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN-781301
3:DIPANKAR BARMAN (ACS)
CIRCLE OFFICER
SARTHEBARI REVENUE CIRCLE
P.O. AND P.S. SARTHEBARI
IN THE DISTRICT OF BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN-781307
4:DR ILA BANIA
CIRCLE OFFICER
SARUPETA REVENUE CIRCLE
P.O.AND P.S. SARUPETA
IN THE DISTRICT OF BARPETA
ASSAM
PIN-781318
5:SHRI PARTHA PRATIM MAJUMDAR
I.A.S.
DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
BAJALI
P.O. AND P.S. BAJALI-781325
DISTRICT- BAJALI
ASSAM.
6:SHRI NIRMAL JYOTI SARMA
A.C.S.
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
BAJALI
P.O. AND P.S. BAJALI-781325
DISTRICT- BAJALI
ASSAM.
7:SMTI. PARINEETA CHAKRABORTY
A.C.S.
C/O SARUPETA REVENUE CIRCLE
P.O. AND P.S. SARUPETA
DISTRICT- BAJALI
ASSAM
Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. RS Chauhan Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. D Nath For respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7
B E F O R E
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
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
24.08.2026
Heard Mr. RS Chauhan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D Nath, the learned counsel who appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7.
2. The present application has been filed alleging willful and deliberate violation to the order dated 22.01.2024 passed in WP(C)No.7539/2023.
3. For the purpose of appreciating the present proceedings this Court finds it pertinent to quote paragraph 10 of the order dated 22.01.2024 as hereinunder: “10. Taking the above fact situation obtaining, this court has found force in the submission of the learned State Counsel that a direction can be given considering the fact that the proceedings is pending in the form of Case no. 690, to the respondent authorities, more particularly, the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 to bring the proceedings of Case no 690 to a logical conclusion as expeditiously as possible. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondent nos. 2 – 4, more particularly, the respondent no. 2 to bring the proceedings of Case no. 690, initiated on the basis of an application filed by the petitioner as an applicant under Section 23[1] of the Tenancy Act, 1971 to final conclusion as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 6 [six] months from today. In the event the petitioner finds himself to be in any manner aggrieved by the formal order to be passed by the said respondents at the conclusion of the proceedings of Case no. 690, it will be open for the petitioner to resort to appropriate legal remedy as permissible under the law.”
4. From a perusal of the above-quoted directions, it is seen that the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court had directed the respondent No.2 to bring the proceedings of Case No. 690 to a final conclusion as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 6 (six) month from the date of the said order. On account of non-compliance of the above-quoted directions, the instant contempt proceeding was filed.
5. Mr. D Nath, the learned counsel, who represents the respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7 has produced before this Court a copy of the order dated 22.07.2026 whereby the proceedings of Case No.690 has been brought to a logical conclusion by rejecting the petitioner’s application. The said order dated 22.07.2026 which was produced before this Court is kept on record and marked with the letter ‘X’.
6. A copy of the said order has also been provided to the learned counsel for the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the contempt proceeding stands dropped.
8. Dropping of the contempt proceedings shall not preclude or prejudice the petitioner to challenge the order dated 22.07.2026 before the appropriate Forum.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant