Gauhati High Court
Cont.Cas(C)/364/2018 of BIRENDRA CHANDRA BRAHMA AND ANR. Vs SHYAM JAGANNATHAN AND 2 ORS. on 10 June 2026
GAHC010170312018 2026:GAU-AS:8298 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/364/2018 BIRENDRA CHANDRA BRAHMA AND ANR. S/O- LATE ANANTA RAM BRAHMA, R/O- WARD NO. 2, BARPETA ROAD, DIST- BARPETA AND P.O, IN THE DISTRICT BARPETA,
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010170312018
2026:GAU-AS:8298
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/364/2018
BIRENDRA CHANDRA BRAHMA AND ANR.
S/O- LATE ANANTA RAM BRAHMA, R/O- WARD NO. 2, BARPETA ROAD, DIST- BARPETA AND P.O, IN THE DISTRICT BARPETA, ASSAM.
2: ANANTH RAJKUMAR
S/O- LATE AMERANDRA RAJKUMAR
R/O- SBI ROAD
HAFLONG
DIST- DIMAHASAO
PIN- 78881
VERSUS
SHYAM JAGANNATHAN AND 2 ORS.
COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, FINANCE(PRU) DEPTT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 06
2:AHMED HUSSAIN
IAS
COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DEPTT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI- 06
3:DR. M ANGAMUTHU
IAS
COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
GAD AND SAD
COMMISSIONER-NAD
BLOCK D
3RD FLOOR
JANATA BHAWAN
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6
Page No.# 2/2
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. U K NAIR, MS. H BEGUM,MS. P BORGOHAIN,MR. M P
SARMA,MS. N SHYAMAL
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. P N GOSWAMI (R2), MR. B GOGOI (R1),MR. D SAIKIA
(R1),MR P NAYAK (R1)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
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
11-06-2026
Mr. R Singha, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he will not press the contempt petition inasmuch as the entire issue can be determined in the writ petition as to the validity of the Notification and WT Message assailed in the writ petition. Accordingly, the present contempt petition stands closed.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant