SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 9172

HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
JITEN ABANG – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS. – Respondent
WP(C) / 1949 / 2018



GAHC010056632018 2025:GAU-AS:17435

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/1949/2018

JITEN ABANG

AMGAON KHARGULI, VILLAGE- PANIKHAITY, CHANDRAPUR REVENUE

CIRCLE, KAMRUP, ASSAM

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS.

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER LOWER ASSAM DIVISION,

GUWAHATI, KAMRUP, ASSAM.

2:THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR

FOOD

CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS

KAMRUP (M)

GUWAHATI

ASSAM.

3:THE DIRECTOR

FOOD

CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS

ASSAM

BHANGAGARH

GUWAHATI-5

ASSAM.

4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

FOOD

CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS.

5:THE INSPECTOR FOOD CIVIL AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS ASSAM For the Petitioner(s) : None appears For the Respondent(s) : Mr. G. Bokolial, Govt. Advocate BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

ORDER

15.12.2025 Date :

None appears on behalf of the petitioner on call.

2. Mr. G. Bokolial, the learned Government Advocate appears on behalf of the respondents.

3. The petitioner herein has approached this Court challenging the order dated 20.09.2017 passed by the District Commissioner, Kamrup, Lower Assam Division, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and further sought direction for re- issuance of license bearing No. APDAO/RL/GAU/A(77) in the name of the petitioner.

4. It is seen that pursuant to the filing of the instant writ petition, this Court had issued notice. Almost seven (7) years have elapsed since then. It is further seen that an affidavit-in- opposition was filed by the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (M) on

09.06.2023 detailing out the reasons for cancellation of the petitioner’s license and dismissal of the appeal.

5. It is also seen that the petitioner has not chosen to file any reply thereafter. It therefore appears that the petitioner has lost interest in the instant proceedings.

6. Consequently, this Court, therefore, dismisses the instant writ petition for non-prosecution.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top