Disposed¶26

The Union of India v. Susmita Das and Ors.

Gauhati HC3 Apr 2025I.A.(Civil)/2563/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Deletion of respondent from writ petition; impleadment of necessary party; N.F. Railway (Construction), Maligaon; CORE/GHY Gr.257 transferred to N.F. Railway Construction; Union of India represented by GM NFR; amendment of cause title; service on contesting parties; Gauhati High Court interlocutory application I.A.(Civil)/2563/2024; order dated 04.04.2025; Justice Arun Dev Choudhury; advocates Gautam Goswami, H Bezbarua, R. Mazumdar.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for deletion of respondent No. 1 rejected; permission granted to implead N. F. Railway (Construction), represented by the General Manager (Construction), N. F. Railway, Maligaon, Guwahati-11, as party respondent No. 8 in the connected writ petition; cause title to be amended and served on contesting parties; I.A. disposed of. ¶26

The Union of India Vs Susmita Das and Ors. — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the name of respondent No. 1 should be deleted from the array of parties in the connected writ petition. +1 more

¶19

Court's answer

The Court rejected the prayer for deleting the name of respondent No. 1 from the array of parties.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

N. F. Railway (Construction), Maligaon, Guwahati is a necessary party to the connected writ petition.

¶23

Key takeaways

Learned counsel for the opposite party/petitioner is permitted to implead N. F. Railway (Construction), represented by the General Manager (Construction), N. F. Railway, Maligaon, Guwahati-11, as party respondent No. 8 in the connected writ petition.ratio¶24
Mr. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the opposite party/petitioner, directed to amend the cause title, submit it to the Registry and serve a copy of the amended cause title on the contesting parties.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Dev Choudhury), order dated 04.04.2025 in I.A.(Civil)/2563/2024 — an interlocutory application by the Union of India (GM, NFR, Maligaon) in a connected writ petition seeking deletion of respondent No. 1, on the plea that the writ petitioner ought instead to have impleaded the Central Organization for Railway Electrification, Guwahati Gr. 257 (CORE/GHY Gr.257), since transferred to N.F. Railway, Construction, Maligaon. Held: N.F. Railway (Construction) is a necessary party; the prayer to delete respondent No. 1 was rejected, but the petitioner's counsel was permitted to implead N.F. Railway (Construction), represented by the General Manager (Construction), N.F. Railway, Maligaon, Guwahati-11, as party respondent No. 8, with a direction to amend the cause title and serve the amended copy on contesting parties. I.A. disposed of.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010179532021

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2563/2024

¶6

THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE GM NFR MALIGAON GUWAHATI KAMRUP(M) ASSAM-781011

¶7

VERSUS SUSMITA DAS AND ORS W/O- LATE DIGANTA DAS R/O- BHABANIPUR KAILASH NAGAR NOONMATI KAMRUP METRO ASSAM-781020 2:HIRAMONI DAS D/O- LATE DIGANTA DAS R/O- BHABANIPUR KAILASH NAGAR NOONMATI KAMRUP METRO ASSAM-781020

¶8

3:MANASH DAS

¶9

(SINCE THE PETITIONER NO 2 AND 3 ARE MINORS THEREFORE THEY ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER WHO IS A PETITIONER NO 1)

¶10

Page No.# 2/4

¶11

S/O- LATE DIGANTA DAS R/O- BHABANIPUR KAILASH NAGAR NOONMATI KAMRUP METRO ASSAM-781020 4:SHRI SABIN DAS S/O- LATE UPEN DAS ( FATHER OF LATE DIGNATA DAS) R/O- BHABANIPUR KAILASH NAGAR NOONMATI KAMRUP METRO ASSAM-781020 5:SARASWATI DAS W/O- SABIN DAS (MOTHER OF LATE DIGANTA DAS) R/O- BHABANIPUR KAILASH NAGAR NOONMATI KAMRUP METRO ASSAM-781020 6:THE ASSAM POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS MD BIJULEE BHAWAN PALTAN BAZAR GHY-781001 7:THE SUB DIVISIONAL ENGINEER

¶12

CHANDMARI ELECTRICAL SUB DIVISION APDCL LAR GUWAHATI-3 8:THE OC CHANDMARI POLICE STATION GUWAHATI DIST- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM-781003 9:RAJIB SING S/O PREM BAHADUR SINGH 68 CHAK SATAI MISIR ARAIL KARCHHANA P.S- NAINI

¶13

Page No.# 3/4

¶14

DIST- ALLAHABAD UTTAR PRADESH PIN- 211008. 10:UTPAL BARMAN C/O- NORTH EAST FRONTIER RAILWAYS MALIGAON GUWAHATI KAMRUP (M) ASSAM-781011 11:THE CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR INSPECTORATE OF ELECTRICITY POWER (ELECTRICITY DEPARTMENT) WEST END BLOCK 1ST FLOOR HOUSEFED COMPLEX DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006. -----------Advocate for : GAUTAM GOSWAMI Advocate for : MR H BEZBARUA appearing for SUSMITA DAS AND ORS

¶15

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY

¶16

ORDER

¶17

04.04.2025

¶18

Heard Mr. G. Goswami, learned Standing Counsel for the Railway/applicant. Also heard Mr. R. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the opposite party/petitioner.

¶19

The present application is filed for deleting the name of the respondent No. 1 as party respondent in the connected writ petition.

¶20

It is the contention that the writ petitioner ought not to have impleaded respondent No. 1 instead of Central Organization for Railway Electrification, Guwahati Gr. 257 (CORE/GHY Gr.257) which has now been transferred to N. F. Railway, Construction, Maligaon, Guwahati-11 is the necessary party.

¶21

Page No.# 4/4

¶22

It is also contended that the aforesaid entity i.e. N. F. Railway (Construction) Maligaon, Guwahati is a separate Construction Organization.

¶23

This Court is also of the opinion that the said entity shall be a necessary party.

¶24

Therefore, this Court though rejects the prayer for deleting the name of the respondent No. 1 from the array parties, however, the learned counsel for the opposite party/petitioner is permitted to implead the N. F. Railway (Construction) represented by the General Manager (Construction), N. F. Railway, Maligaon, Guwahati-11 as party respondent No. 8 in the connected writ petition.

¶25

Accordingly, Mr. Mazumdar, learned counsel for the opposite party/petitioner shall amend the cause title, submit the same before the Registry for doing the needful and serve a copy of the amended cause title to the contesting parties.

¶26

I.A. stands disposed of.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

The Union of India v. Susmita Das and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Union of India v. Susmita Das and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pacific Institute of Technology and Management Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Skipper Limited Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Farid Ali and 6 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 70 Ors.

Habibur Rahman Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

M/S Saikhowa Sadiya Meen Samabai Samiti Ltd. Vs Yadav Pegu and Anr.

Nazrul Islam and 3 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.