Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. Gauhati High Court/
  4. 2024/
  5. January

Hori Diyum vs. the State of Ap and 6 Ors.

Decided on 31 January 2024• Citation: WP(C)/159/2022• Gauhati High Court
Download PDF

Read Judgment


        Page No.# 1/2                                                               
        GAHC040004652022                                                            
                             THE  GAUHATI    HIGH   COURT                           
          (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL  PRADESH)           
                                  (ITANAGAR BENCH)                                  
                                Case No. : WP(C)/159/2022                           
                 Hori Diyum S/o Lt. Jumsor Diyum, Village Kombo Tarsu, PO/PS Aalo District West
                 Siang, Arunachal Pradesh.                                          
                 VERSUS                                                             
                 THE STATE OF AP and 6 Ors. Represented by the Secretary (PHE and WS), Govt. of
                 Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar                                        
                 2:The Chief Engineer Age: 0 Occupation : PHE and WS Western Zone Namsai
                 District Namsai Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh.                        
                 3:The Superintending Engineer Age: 0 Occupation : PHE and WS Circle Bene Aalo
                 West Siang District Aalo.                                          
                 4:The Deputy Commissioner Age: 0 Occupation : West Siang District Govt. of
                 Arunachal Pradesh Aalo.                                            
                 5:The Executive Engineer Age: 0 Occupation : PHE and WS Aalo Division Govt. of
                 Arunachal Pradesh Aalo                                             
                 6:Hengo Lollen Age: 0 Occupation : S/o Lt. Tosen Lollen Chairman All Kombo
                 Welfare and Development Society (AKWDS) R/o Vill Kombo Pomte P.O/P.S- Aalo
                 West Siang District Arunachal Pradesh.                             
                 7:Imo Lollen Age: 0 Occupation : S/o- Shri Toi Lollen Chairman Kombo Papak
                 Village Development Committee (KPVDC) R/o Village Kombo Papak P.O/P.S- Aalo
                 West Siang District Arunachal Prades                               
             Advocate for the Petitioner : T T Tara                                 
             Advocate for the Respondent : GA (AP)                                  

        Page No.# 2/2                                                               
                                       BEFORE                                       
                             HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.K.MEDHI                           
                                       ORDER                                        
        Date : 31-01-2024                                                           
            Heard Mr. G. Bam, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. I. 
        Riram, learned  Additional Senior Government Advocate  for the  State       
        respondents and Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel for the respondents no. 6 & 7.
           The subject matter of this writ petition concerns a scheme for construction
        of water tank and according to the petitioner, there was no Detailed Project
        Report (DPR). However, it is submitted that during the pendency of this writ
        petition, the construction has been made  and  the scheme   has been        
        implemented.                                                                
             The learned counsel for the petitioner, accordingly submits that there may
        not be any live cause of action to be further adjudicated.                  
             Accordingly, the writ petition is closed.                              
                                                          JUDGE                     
        Comparing Assistant