Allowed

M/s Lamha Enterprises v. The State of Ap and 6 Others

Gauhati HC4 Mar 2021IA(C)/38/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed an application seeking the impleadment of M/s Passang Sikap as respondent No. 7 in a connected writ petition. The court held that the outcome of the main petition may affect the rights of the firm.

What did the court decide?

M/s Passang Sikap, represented by Shri Passang Sikap (Proprietor), is impleaded as respondent No. 7 in the connected writ petition.

M/s Lamha Enterprises Vs The State of Ap and 6 Others — Writ and Judicial Review | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC040002512021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)

¶4

Case No. : IA(C) 38/2021

¶5

1:M/s Lamha Enterprises

¶6

REPRESENED BY SHRI NABAM BATE, S/O LT. NABAM KAMING, VILLAGE ARUNG, PO MENGIO PS SAGALEE DIST. PAPUMPARE, AP.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:The State of AP and 6 Others REPRESENTED THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARYT, GOVT. OF AP, ITANAGAR.

¶9

2:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FOREST AND ENVIRINMENT GOVT. OF AP ITANAGAR.

¶10

3:THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST WEST CIRCLE BANDERDEWA DEPTT. OF FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT GOVT. OF AP.

¶11

4:THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (CAMPA) HOFF AND PRL. SECY GOVT. OF AP ITANAGAR.

¶12

5:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER BANDERDEWA DIVISION DEPTT. OF FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

PAPUM PARE DIST . GOVT. OF AP.

¶15

6:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER SAGALEE DIVISION DEPTT OF FOREST AND ENVIRONMENT PAPUM PARE DIST. GOVT. OF AP.

¶16

7:THE M/S PASSANG SIKAP REPRESENTED BY THE SHRI PASSANG SIKAP (PROPRIETOR) RESIDENT OF BANDERDEWA PO/PS BANDERDEWA DIST. PAPUM PARE AP

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : Chorpok Modi

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP)

¶19

Linked Case : WP(C) 326/2019

¶20

1:M/S LAMHA ENTERPRISES VILLAGE ARUNG PO MENGIO PS SAGALEE DIST PAPUMPARE AP REPRESENTED BY SHRI NABAM BATE S/O LT. NABAM KAMING PROPRIETOR OF M/S LAMHA ENTERPRISES.

¶21

VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF A.P. REPRESENTED THROUGH C.SECRETARY GOVT OF AP ITANAGAR 2:THE PCCF and P.S. DEPTT. OF FOREST and ENVIRONMENT GOVT OF AP ITANAGAR

¶22

Page No.# 3/4

¶23

3:THE CCF WESTERN CIRCLE BANDERDEWA DEPT OF FOREST and ENV. GOVT OF AP

¶24

4:THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST CAMPA HOFF and PRL. SECY GOVT OF AP ITANGAR

¶25

5:THE DFO BANDERDEWA DIVISION DEPTT OF FOREST and ENV PAPUMPARE DISTT GOVT OF AP

¶26

6:THE DFO SAGALEE DIVISON DEPTT OF FOREST and ENV PAPUMPARE DISTT GOVT OF AP.

¶27

Advocate for the Petitioner : MrT Loma Advocate for the Respondent : GA AP

¶28

BEFORE

¶29

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO

¶30

ORDER

¶31

Date : 04-03-2021

¶32

Heard Mr. M. Tunar, learned counsel for the applicant, who submits that the applicant by filing this application seeks impleadment of M/S Passang Sikap, represented by Shri Passang Sikap (Proprietor), resident of Banderdewa, PO & PS Banderdewa, District Papum Pare, Arunachal Pradesh as respondent No. 7 in the main writ petition. The learned counsel submits that the outcome of the writ petition may affect the rights and interest of the said firm and therefore, Court may allow his impleadment.

¶33

Mr. D. Soki, learned State Counsel for the Forest Department submits that he has

¶34

Page No.# 4/4

¶35

no objection if the said firm is impleaded as party respondent. Upon hearing the submissions made by the parties and on perusal of the application, M/S Passang Sikap, represented by Shri Passang Sikap (Proprietor), resident of Banderdewa, PO & PS Banderdewa, District Papum Pare, Arunachal Pradesh be impleaded as respondent No. 7 in the connected writ petition.

¶36

I.A stands disposed of as allowed.

¶37

JUDGE

¶38

Comparing Assistant

M/s Lamha Enterprises v. The State of Ap and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Lamha Enterprises v. The State of Ap and 6 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ogam Tamir Vs The State of Ap and 6 Others

Byabang Laden Vs Madhurani Teola and 2 Ors.

Dejom Belo Vs Madhurani Teola and 2 Ors.

Bomka Hano and Anr. Vs The State of Ap and 3 Others

Shri Tacha Gongo Vs the State of Ap and 4 Ors.

Nuney Tayeng Vs the Union of India and 8 Ors.