- Court
- High Court of Gauhati
- Decided
- 9 December 2024
- Bench
- Robin Phukan
- Case no.
- Cont.Cas(C) 27/2024
Judgment
Page No.# 1/4 GAHC040014042024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : WP(C)/468/2024 Kasam Veo Son of Late Tukiang Veo, resident of DFO Colony, PO and PS Banderdewa, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh.
VERSUS The Union of India and 8 Ors represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt of India. 2:The Union of India represented by the Secretary Department of Border Management Govt of India. 3:The State of AP represented by the Secretary Itanagar 4:The Deputy Commissioner Seppa 5:The Additional Deputy Commissioner Page No.# 2/4 Chayangtajo 6:The Chief Engineer (ARRDA) PMGSY Itanagar. 7:The Second in Command (Vibrant Program-I) Govt of India Room No. 21 Heritage Building MDC National Stadium New Delhi 110001 8:The Superintending Enigneer Rural Work Circle Rupa West Kameng District 9:The Executive Engineer cum DPIU-II Chayangtajo Division Advocate for the Petitioner : Bedanta Kaushik, 1 P Borah,Takar Bagang Advocate for the Respondent : Marto Kato, SC (RWD),Gimi Tarak,GA (AP),DSGI Linked Case : Cont.Cas(C)/27/2024 Kasam Veo Age: 38 Page No.# 3/4 Address:Son of Late Tukiang Veo a permanent resident of Village Veo PO Sawa PS Chayangtajo VERSUS Nitu Tsering Glow and 3 Ors Address:IRS Secretary Department of Rural Works Itanagar. 2:Er Nilly Likha Kamin Address:The Superintending Engineer Rural Work Circle Rupa West Kameng District Govt of Arunachal Pradesh. 3:Er. Nyayi Regia Address:The Chief Engineer Arunachal Pradesh Rural Road Development Authority PMGSY Itanagar. 4:Er. Kaku Pangia Address:The Executive Engineer cum DPIU-II Chayang Tajo Division Govt of Arunachal Pradesh. ------------ Advocate for : Bedanta Kaushik Advocate for : appearing for Nitu Tsering Glow and 3 Ors: Advocate , Page No.# 4/4 , , appearing for 2, 3, 4, respectively.
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER
10.12.2024
Mr. T. Bagang, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has the instruction to withdraw these petitions. The prayer is allowed. Accordingly, these petitions stand disposed of on withdrawal. However, liberty will remain with the petitioner to approach this Court again, by filing appropriate petition. Interim order passed earlier, if any, stands vacated.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.