Allowed an interlocutory application for the impleadment of two applicants as Respondent Nos. 10 and 11 in a connected writ petition, holding that they are necessary parties; order disposed of.
Applicants to be impleaded as Respondents No. 10 and 11 in the connected writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC040007532023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : IA(C)/99/2023
M/s Palo Malo Enterprise
Represented by its Proprietor Shri Tatung Takar having its Registered Office at Niti Vihar, PS Itanagar, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF AP and 8 Ors.
to be represented through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar. 2:the Secretary
Age: 0 Occupation :
3:the Executive Engineer Age: 0 Occupation :
4:the Assistant Engineer Age: 0 Occupation :
5:Tagru Tate Age: 0 Occupation :
6:Tagru Taring Age: 0 Occupation :
Page No.# 2/3
7:John Tagru Age: 0 Occupation : 8:Tagru Takia Age: 0 Occupation : 9:Tagru Bai Age: 0 Occupation
Advocate for the Petitioner : M Nibo
Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP)
BEFORE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA
ORDER
Date : 10.07.2023
Heard Mr. Michi Nibo, learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard Mr. R. L. Thungon, learned counsel for the sole Opposite Party/writ petitioner.
This is an interlocutory application seeking impleadment of the applicants, namely, (1). Shri Gichik Tachu, S/o Lt. Gichik Tachang, Resident of E Sector, Itanagar, PO & PS – Itanagar, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh, Proprietor of M/s G.A. Enterprise; and Shri Lindum Taying, S/o Lt. Lindum Tachu, Resident of Dokum Colony, PO & PS – Itanagar, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh, Proprietor of M/s Lindum Taying Enterprise; as Respondents No. 10 and 11, contending that they are the necessary parties in WP(c)202(AP)2023.
Page No.# 3/3
The prayer for impleadment as above, has not been opposed by Mr. Thungon, learned counsel for the sole Opposite Party/writ petitioner.
In view of the above, this interlocutory application is hereby allowed.
The applicants, noted-above, shall be impleaded as Respondents No. 10 and 11, respectively, in the connected writ petition.
The interlocutory application accordingly stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicants should be impleaded as necessary parties in the connected writ petition.
M/s Palo Malo Enterprise
The State of AP
Nani Tagia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
