RUDRAM SAIKIA vs UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS Advocate - DY.S.G.I., ,SC, WATER RESOURCE — WP(C)/2781/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226.

CNR: GAHC010103432026

e-Filing Number

22-05-2026

Filing Number

WP(C)/5900/2026

Filing Date

22-May-2026

Registration No

WP(C)/2781/2026

Registration Date

27-May-2026

Judge

CIVIL Bench-IV

Coram

CIVIL Bench-IV

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

10180 - Award of contracts by the State or its instrumentalities ( 172 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Last updated 03-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RUDRAM SAIKIA

    Adv. MRS. K K CHOUDHURY,D KALITA,D KALITA, ,D KALITA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS Advocate - DY.S.G.I., ,SC, WATER RESOURCE

  2. 2.BRAHMAPUTRA BOARD BASISTHA

  3. 3.THE STATE OF ASSAM

  4. 4.THE CHIEF ENGINEER

  5. 5.THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER SIVASAGAR

  6. 6.THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

  7. 7.THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

Case History

  1. 01-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr. Justice Kardak EteView PDF

    Case Summary: WP(C)/2781/2026 - Rudram Saikia v. Union of India On 01.06.2026, the Gauhati High Court heard a writ petition filed by Rudram Saikia against the Union of India and water resource authorities. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the matter pertains to Bench-IV and requested relisting before the appropriate bench. Justice Kardak Ete accepted this submission and ordered that the case be listed before the appropriate Bench for substantive hearing. The matter was adjourned for relisting. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  2. 22-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP(C)/2781/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP(C)/2781/2026 - Rudram Saikia v. Union of India On 01.06.2026, the Gauhati High Court heard a writ petition filed by Rudram Saikia against the Union of India and water resource authorities. The petitioner's counsel submitted that the matter pertains to Bench-IV and requested relisting before the appropriate bench. Justice Kardak Ete accepted this submission and ordered that the case be listed before the appropriate Bench for substantive hearing. The matter was adjourned for relisting. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case