State water resources officials sought review of a common judgment dated 27.09.2022 directing payment under a scheme. Following a coordinate bench's dismissal of an identical review petition, this Court held no good ground for review existed and dismissed the review petition without costs.
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.# 1/4
GAHC010130252025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Review.Pet./185/2025
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, WATER RESOURCES DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006, ASSAM.
WATER RESOURCES DEPTT. CHANDMARI GUWAHATI 03 ASSAM.
3: THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER
NAGAON WATER RESOURCE CIRCLE NAGAON ASSAM.
4: THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
MORIGAON WATER RESOURCE DIVISION MORIGAON ASSAM
VERSUS
MD BAHARUL ISLAM S/O ABUL HUSSAIN, VILL. AMIN PATTY, P.O. NAGAON, P.S. SADAR, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR R M DAS, SC, WATER RESOURCE
Advocate for the Respondent : ,
Page No.# 2/4
Linked Case : WP(C)/3232/2022
MD. BAHARUL ISLAM S/O- ABUL HUSSAIN VILL- AMIN PATTY P.O- NAGAON P.S- SADAR DISTNAGAON ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-06
2:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MORIGAON WATER RESOURCE DIVISION MORIGAON
3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER NAGAON WATER RESOURCE CIRCLE NAGAON
4:THE CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-03
-----------Advocate for : MR. M A SHEIKH Advocate for : SC WATER RESOURCE appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
Page No.# 3/4
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR
ORDER
Date : 13.08.2025
Heard Mr. R. M. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The present review application has been filed praying for review of the common Judgment and Order dated 27.09.2022, passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C).No.4734/2021 and other analogous matters.
3. Similar review petitions, assailing the judgment and order dated 27.09.2022, passed in WP(C).No.7833/2018 and other analogous matters was also a subject matter of challenge in Review Petition No.137/2025.
4. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on consideration of the matter was pleased to dismiss the said review petition vide order dated 30.07.2025. The conclusions drawn by the co-ordinate Bench in the order dated 30.07.2025, passed in Review Petition No.137/2025, being relevant is extracted hereinbelow:
“5. Be that as it may, this Court finds that by the order dated 27.09.2022 direction was also issued to the Ministry of Jal Shakti to release the amount due under the scheme. The Ministry of Jal Shakti was duly represented by Mr. R. K. Dev Choudhury, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India but no objection was raised by the learned counsel for the respondents on the ground of nonjoinder of necessary party. Moreover, the said Ministry has also not sought any review of the order.
Page No.# 4/4
learned counsel for the parties including the Deputy Solicitor General of India representing the Ministry of Jal Shakti in the Union of India as well as the Brahmaputra Board.
5. This Court is in respectful agreement with the conclusions reached by the Co-ordinate Bench vide Judgment and Order dated 30.07.2025 in Review Petition No.137/2025. The issue arising in the present proceeding being similar to the one arising in Review Petition No.137/2025, the decision as arrived at therein, would squarely apply to the present Review Petition.
6. Accordingly, in view of the conclusions drawn above, the present Review Petition is held to be devoid of merit and the same consequently stands dismissed.
However there would be no order as to costs.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order dated 27.09.2022 in WP(C) No.4734/2021 and analogous matters was liable to be reviewed on grounds of non-joinder of a necessary party.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Review Petition No.137/2025Relied on¶5
The State of Assam and 3 Ors (represented by Secretary, Water Resources Department)
The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department
The Superintending Engineer, Nagaon Water Resource Circle
The Executive Engineer, Morigaon Water Resource Division
Md Baharul Islam
N. Unni Krishnan Nair
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
