MD. IFTIKAR HUSSAIN PATHAN vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS Advocate - GA, ASSAM — WP(C)/2324/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Of on 06th May 2026.
CNR: GAHC010084872026
e-Filing Number
30-04-2026
Filing Number
WP(C)/4835/2026
Filing Date
30-Apr-2026
Registration No
WP(C)/2324/2026
Registration Date
04-May-2026
Judge
Honourable Mr. Justice Devashis Baruah
Coram
Honourable Mr. Justice Devashis Baruah
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
10175 - Orders under the Essential Commodities Act. ( 168 )
Judicial Branch
Writ Section
Decision Date
06-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Of
Last updated 09-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.MD. IFTIKAR HUSSAIN PATHAN
Adv. MR. M K HUSSAIN,MRS. S Y AHMED,MRS. S Y AHMED, ,MR. M ALOM,MS. F H AHMED,MRS. S Y AHMED
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS Advocate - GA (Government Advocate), ASSAM
-
2.THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, NAGAON
-
3.THE ADDL. DISTRICT COMMISSIONER, NAGAON, I/C
-
4.THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
-
5.JAHIRUL ISLAM
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-May-2026
Honourable Mr. Justice Devashis BaruahView PDF
Case Summary: The Gauhati High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by MD. Iftikar Hussain Pathan challenging the non-consideration of a representation by Fair Price Shop beneficiaries seeking revival of a license suspension order dated 11.09.2025. The court found the petition not maintainable under Article 226 because the representation contained no allegations that Respondent No.5 had violated the conditions imposed in the lifting order dated 14.10.2025. The court observed that beneficiaries retain the right to file future representations if the license holder commits fresh violations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
30-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WP(C)/2324/2026
Case Summary: The Gauhati High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by MD. Iftikar Hussain Pathan challenging the non-consideration of a representation by Fair Price Shop beneficiaries seeking revival of a license suspension order dated 11.09.2025. The court found the petition not maintainable under Article 226 because the representation contained no allegations that Respondent No.5 had violated the conditions imposed in the lifting order dated 14.10.2025. The court observed that beneficiaries retain the right to file future representations if the license holder commits fresh violations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts