Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Civil)/180/2026 of THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL A AND E Vs SRI RUPAM PHUKAN on 3 February 2026
GAHC010013672026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/180/2026 THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL A AND E ASSAM, MAIDAMGAON, BELTOLA, GUWAHATI, PIN781029 VERSUS SRI RUPAM PHUKAN AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O PRITAM PHUKAN,
GAHC010013672026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/180/2026
THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL A AND E
ASSAM, MAIDAMGAON, BELTOLA, GUWAHATI, PIN781029
VERSUS
SRI RUPAM PHUKAN
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O PRITAM PHUKAN, PERMANENT RESIDENT
OF-H.NO. 1A, ZOO JAPORIGOG PATH, NEAR ASEB SUB STATION, JAPORIGOG, KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM, PIN781005
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
HOME A DEPARTMENT
DISPUR - 781006.
3:THE JOINT SECRETARY
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
HOME A DEPARTMENT. DISPUR - 781006
4:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
DISPUR-781006
ASSAM
5:DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM
ULUBARI
GUWAHATI- 781007.
6:INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (ADMIN)
ASSAM
ULUBARI
GUWAHATI- 781007.
7:INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (MPC
ASSAM
ULUBARI
GUWAHATI- 781007.
8:DR RUBUL GOGOI CUM PRESENTING OFFICER
APS
COMMANDANT
3RD APTF BN.
KHAJUABEEL
784521
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. C BORUAH, Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FINANCE, MS. B CHETRY,MR R DHAR
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
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 : 04-02-2026 Mr. C. Baruah, learned counsel for the applicant/Accountant General who is also been arrayed as the respondent No.8 in W.P(C) No. 6937/2024. The learned Standing counsel for the Accountant General(A & E) has submitted that they are not the necessary party in the writ petition and therefore, prays for striking out their name. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a copy of the I.A(C) has not been served upon and therefore, he cannot answer to the assertion made in the writ petition. Taking note of the submissions made, it is provided that the learned counsel for the applicant shall serve a copy of the I.A(C) on the learned counsel for the respondents. However, since the applicant submits that they are not a necessary party to answer the assertion in the writ petition, they are exempted from filing of the affidavit-in-opposition. I.A (C) stands disposed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant