Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/3474/2016 of AJANTA BORDOLOI Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM and 16 ORS on 20 August 2026
GAHC010017702016 2026:GAU-AS:12049 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3474/2016 AJANTA BORDOLOI W/O SRI TIKEN BORDOLOI R/O VILL- MAZGAON, P.O. BHUMURGURI P.S. MIKIRBHETA, DIST. MORIGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM and 16
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010017702016
2026:GAU-AS:12049
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3474/2016
AJANTA BORDOLOI
W/O SRI TIKEN BORDOLOI R/O VILL- MAZGAON, P.O. BHUMURGURI P.S.
MIKIRBHETA, DIST. MORIGAON, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM and 16 ORS
THROUGH COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006.
For the Petitioner(s) : None appears
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. H. Sarma, Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate Mr. P. Hazarika, Advocate BEFORE
HONOURABLE 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
Date : 21.08.2026
None appears on behalf of the petitioner on call.
2. Mr. H. Sarma, the learned Additional Senior Government Page No.# 2/2 Advocate appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and Mr. P. Hazarika, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 9 to 16.
3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the resolution dated 23.05.2016 pertaining to the No- Confidence Motion against the President of the Borbhogia Gaon Panchayat.
4. The period of the said Panchayat has long since expired and as such, nothing survives for consideration in the present writ petition. Under such circumstances, it is therefore seen that the petitioner is being not represented as the petitioner had lost interest.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed at it has become infructuous.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant