Disposed¶22

Dipen Chandra Das and 9 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 13 Ors.

Gauhati HC6 Jan 2026WP(C)/3027/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Temple management committee dispute; Agyathuri Sri Sri Ganesh Mandir; interference by Deputy Commissioner Kamrup and State authorities; interim restraint order dated 18.02.2019 by Co-ordinate Bench; fresh committee of local residents constituted during pendency; writ petition disposed of as infructuous; interim order merged; Gauhati High Court; WP(C); Kamrup, Assam.

What did the court decide?

In view of the replacement of the earlier Committee by a new Committee comprising local residents and the absence of any current interference by the State Authorities, no further cause survives in the writ petition. ¶21

Dipen Chandra Das and 9 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 13 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010023622017

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/3027/2017

¶6

DIPEN CHANDRA DAS and 9 ORS.

¶7

S/O. SRI KALIKANTA DAS, VILL. DALIBARI, P.O. DADARA, P.S. HAJO, DIST. KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN-781104.

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM and 13 ORS.

¶10

REP. BY THE COMM. and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HOME and POLITICAL DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY.-781006.

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.M BHAGABATI, DR.H DAS,MS G BORA

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, MR.M R BHARALI(R- 10 to 14),MS.P DAS(R- 10 to 14),MR.B K DAS(R- 10 to 14),MR. D BORAH (R8),MR. R K TALUKDAR (R8)

¶13

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

¶14

ORDER

¶15

07.01.2026

¶16

Heard Mr. M Bhagawati, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. N

¶17

Goswami, learned State Counsel, Assam, for the respondent nos. 1 to 6 and 9.

¶18

The grievance of the petitioners is that Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup and

¶19

Page No.# 2/2

¶20

the other State Authorities had interfered with the functioning of the Managing Committee of the Agyathuri Sri Sri Ganesh Mandir because of which the petitioners have approached this Court. Pursuant to the order dated 18.02.2019 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the authorities were restrained from interfering with the functioning of the Committee. However, during the pendency of the writ petition, the term of the earlier Committee expired and a fresh Committee has now being constituted and the same is supervising and managing the affairs of the said temple. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that as on date no further interference is caused by the State Authorities.

¶21

Considering the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the fact that the Committee earlier constituted has been replaced by a new Committee comprising of the local residents, and no interference as on date has been caused by the State Authorities, no further cause is seen to be alive in the present writ petition.

¶22

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of as infructuous.

¶23

Interim order, if any, stands merged.

¶24

JUDGE

¶25

Comparing Assistant

Dipen Chandra Das and 9 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 13 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dipen Chandra Das and 9 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 13 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dilip Kumar Gogoi Vs the Assam State Housing Board and 2 Ors.

Md. Yasin Ali Vs the Assam State Housing Board and 2 Ors.

Ashish Kumar Dey Vs the Assam State Housing Board and 2 Ors.

MD Abjal Ali Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors.

Abdus Matin Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Raju Das Vs the State of Assam and Othrs