The Gauhati High Court closed the writ petition as the petitioner had expired without substitution and the underlying license agreement had long expired, making adjudication unnecessary.
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
GAHC010155552018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4775/2018
BAKUL SARMAH
S/O- LATE NILAMBER SARMAH, R/O- BARDUARMUKH, SIMALUGURI TOWN, P.O AND P.S- SIMALUGURI, DIST- SIVASAGAR, ASSAM, PIN- 785686
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REP. BY GENERAL MANAGER, N F RAILWAY HEAD QUARTER, MALIGAON, GUWAHATI, DIST- KAMRUP(M), PIN- 781011, ASSAM 2:CHIEF COMMERCIAL MANAGER N F RAILWAY MALIGAON GUWAHATI DIST- KAMRUP(M) PIN- 781011 ASSAM 3:DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER N F RAILWAY TINSUKIA P.O AND P.S- TINSUKIA DIST- TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN- 786125
4:DIVISIONAL COMMERCIAL MANAGER N F RAILWAYS TINSUKIA P.O AND P.S- TINSUKIA DIST- TINSUKIA ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3
PIN- 786125
5:ASSISTANT COMMERCIAL MANAGER N F RAILWAY TINSUKIA P.O AND P.S- TINSUKIA DIST- TINSUKIA ASSAM PIN- 786125 6:THE STATION SUPERINTENDENT N F RAILWAY SIMALUGURI JN. P.O- SIMALUGURI DIST- SIBSAGAR ASSAM PIN- 78568
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S DASGUPTA
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, RAILWAY
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
ORDER
05.01.2024
Heard Shri S Dasgupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri A Barkataki, learned Standing Counsel, Railway.
When this matter was listed on the last occasion i.e. 20.02.2023, Shri Dasgupta, learned counsel had apprised this Court that the petitioner was expired and sought for 2 weeks time to enable him to take appropriate steps.
It is seen that till date, no steps have been taken for substitution of the legal heirs of the petitioner. Apart from the aforesaid fact which leads this Court to come to a conclusion that the matter has been abated, the agreement in question was pursuant to a license in the name of the deceased-petitioner and
Page No.# 3/3
the license was for a period of 5 years i.e. from 01.11.2010 to 31.10.2015 which is also over long back. There is no document annexed in this writ petition filed in the year 2018 regarding extension of the agreement.
Under the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that there is no existing issue to be adjudicated and accordingly, the writ petition is closed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
BAKUL SARMAH
UNION OF INDIA
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
