Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/4332/2026 of GONENDU CHOWDHURY Vs THE UNION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS. on 13 August 2026
GAHC010163622026 2026:GAU-AS:11604 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4332/2026 GONENDU CHOWDHURY S/O LATE JANENDRA CHOWDHURY, R/O HOUSE NO 18, GIRISH ROAD, PO TARAPUR, PS SILCHAR, DIST CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN 788003 VERSUS THE UNION
GAHC010163622026
2026:GAU-AS:11604
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4332/2026
GONENDU CHOWDHURY
S/O LATE JANENDRA CHOWDHURY, R/O HOUSE NO 18, GIRISH ROAD, PO
TARAPUR, PS SILCHAR, DIST CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN 788003
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA, MINISTRY
OF RAILWAYS, RAIL BHAWAN, NEW DELHI
2:THE GENERAL MANAGER
NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY
MALIGAON
GUWAHATI- 781011
3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
CON7 MALIGAON
NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY
ASSAM
4:THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER
CON /JRBM
NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY
SILCHAR
5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER/CON/ II /SCL
NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY
SILCHAR
6:FINANCIAL ADVISOR AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER
(FA AND CAO)
NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY
MALIGAON
7:ASSISTANT FINANCIAL ADVISOR/CON /EXPENDITURE SECTION (XP)
NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY
MALIGAON
8:ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
(AXEN)/ CON/JRBM
NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY
SILCHA
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. M. Biswas, Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Kaushik, 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 : 14.08.2026
Mr. M. Biswas, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that taking into account that the instant proceedings may involve various disputed questions of fact, the petitioner would not like to pursue with the present proceedings and would avail remedies before the competent Court of civil jurisdiction.
2. Taking into account the above, the instant writ petition stands closed on withdrawal.
3. The withdrawal of the instant writ petition shall not prejudice or preclude the petitioner from availing remedies before the competent Court of civil jurisdiction, if permissible under law.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant