Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/1943/2026 of HIGHWAY INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS on 18 August 2026
GAHC010068632026 2026:GAU-AS:11866 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1943/2026 HIGHWAY INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., REGD. OFF. 57-FA, SCHEME NO. 94, PIPLYAHANA JUNCTION, RING ROAD, INDORE (MP) 452016, INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010068632026
2026:GAU-AS:11866
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/1943/2026
HIGHWAY INFRASTRUCTURE LTD.,
REGD. OFF. 57-FA, SCHEME NO. 94, PIPLYAHANA JUNCTION, RING ROAD, INDORE (MP) 452016, INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED PERSON
I.E. ABIDUR RAHMAN, S/O LT AMINUR RAHMAN, FAUZDARIPATTY, MC
BORAH ROAD, NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782001.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, PWD (WORKS), PW (H AND E) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.
2:THE SPL. COMMISSIONER AND SPL. SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT
OF ASSAM
PUBLIC WORKS (BLDG. AND N.H) DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-06.
3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HEALTH AND EDUCATION) PW (H AND E)
DEPARTMENT
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI-03.
4:ADDL. CHIEF ENGINEER (H AND E)
O/O THE CHIEF ENGINEER (H AND E) P.W. (H AND E) DEPARTMENT
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI-03.
5:SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER (H AND E)
0/0 THE CHIEF ENGINEER (H AND E) P. W. (H AND E) DEPARTMENT
CHANDMARI
Page No.# 2/2
GUWAHATI-03
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. S. Ahmed, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : XXX
BEFORE
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.
O R D E R
19.08.2026
Mr. S. Ahmed, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that he has instructions to withdraw the instant writ petition.
2. Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed on withdrawal.
3. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant