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) 13123

HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH
SAKINUR HASSAN – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS – Respondent
WP(C) / 3949 / 2025



GAHC010153892025

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

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

Case No. : WP(C)/3949/2025

SAKINUR HASSAN

S/O SRI SOFIQUL ISLAM, VILL- CHAMDHARA, P.O.- DAGAON, DIST-

NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782124

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS

REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM,

PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR,

GUWAHATI-781001 2:THE SECRETARY

TELIA BEBEJIA GAON PANCHAYAT

P.O. AND P.S.- JURIA

DIST- NAGAON

ASSAM

PIN-782124

3:SMTI. NAYAN MONI RAVA BORA

W/O SRI PRABIN CH. BORA

VILL- TELIA BEBEJIA BAMUNGAON

P.O. AND P.S.- JURIA

DIST- NAGAON

ASSAM

PIN-78212

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. D. A. Kaiyum, Advocate

For the Respondent(s) : Ms. P. Thapa, Standing Counsel

: Mr. S. Zaman, Advocate

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

ORDER

Date : 22.10.2025 Mr. D. A. Kaiyum, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submits that there was a mistake in mentioning the name of the Respondent No.3 inasmuch as, the name of the Respondent No.3 should have been Smti Nayan Moni Rava and not Smti Nayan Moni Rava Bora. He therefore submits that he may be permitted to make necessary correction to the same.

2. Mr. S. Zaman, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No. 3 i.e. Smti. Nayan Moni Rava also submits that actually the name should have been Smti Nayan Moni Rava and not Smti Nayan Moni Rava Bora.

3. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the Petitioner is directed to file a fresh Memo of Parties before the Registry of this Court within 2 (two) days and on the basis thereof, the Registry shall make necessary correction to the Cause Title as well as upload the same in the CIS.

4. Mr. S. Zaman, the learned counsel for the Respondent No.3 submits that he may be permitted to file a reply.

5. The learned Standing counsel for the State Respondents also submits that they would like to file their reply.

6. List this matter again on 17.11.2025.

7. The said affidavit-in-opposition be filed on behalf of the Respondents on or before 14.11.2025.

8. Ms. P. Thapa, the learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 shall also ensure that the records of the settlement proceedings are available before this Court on 17.11.2025.

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