ZAHID ALAM vs STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS Advocate - GA, ASSAM, ,SC, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPT — I.A.(Civil)/1168/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: --Disposed Of on 07th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: GAHC010072172026

e-Filing Number

04-04-2026

Filing Number

I.A.(Civil)/4073/2026

Filing Date

04-Apr-2026

Registration No

I.A.(Civil)/1168/2026

Registration Date

07-Apr-2026

Judge

Honourable Mr. Justice Kardak Ete

Coram

Honourable Mr. Justice Kardak Ete

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

10301 - Interlocutory Application (Civil) ( 382 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

07-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--Disposed Of

Last updated 09-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ZAHID ALAM

    Adv. MR. B J DAS, ,MS. S NATH,H. RAHMAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS Advocate - GA (Government Advocate), ASSAM, ,SC, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPT

  2. 2.THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

  3. 3.THE CHAIRMAN

  4. 4.THE SECRETARY

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-May-2026

    Honourable Mr. Justice Kardak EteView PDF

    The Gauhati High Court allowed Md. Zahid Alam's application to implead the Director, Directorate of Archaeology, Assam as a necessary party (respondent no. 5) in the connected writ petition WP(C) 5704/2025 concerning Na-Pukhuri. The court found the Director to be essential for proper adjudication of whether orders were passed under Rule 11(2) of the Rules of 1964 regarding the archaeological site. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-May-2026

    Order (Impleadment Of Party)

    Honourable Mr. Justice Devashis Baruah

  4. 04-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. I.A.(Civil)/1168/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Gauhati High Court allowed Md. Zahid Alam's application to implead the Director, Directorate of Archaeology, Assam as a necessary party (respondent no. 5) in the connected writ petition WP(C) 5704/2025 concerning Na-Pukhuri. The court found the Director to be essential for proper adjudication of whether orders were passed under Rule 11(2) of the Rules of 1964 regarding the archaeological site. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case