SMTI ANJU DEVI vs NARAYAN KONWAR, IAS AND 4 ORS Advocate - MR. D SAIKIA, ,MS. S CHUTIA,MR. N J KHATANIAR — Cont.Cas(C)/452/2025

Case under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 Section SEC. 11, SEC. 12. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: GAHC010188142025

e-Filing Number

19-08-2025

Filing Number

Cont.Cas(C)/10803/2025

Filing Date

20-Aug-2025

Registration No

Cont.Cas(C)/452/2025

Registration Date

26-Aug-2025

Judge

Honourable Mr. Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair

Coram

Honourable Mr. Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

10200 - Contempt Petition (Civil). ( 178 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Last updated 02-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 Section SEC. 11, SEC. 12
Constitution of India Section ART. 215

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SMTI ANJU DEVI

    Adv. MR B D DAS,MR. H R DAS,MR. H R DAS, ,MR H K SARMA,MR D KALITA,MR. H R DAS

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.NARAYAN KONWAR, IAS AND 4 ORS Advocate - MR. D SAIKIA, ,MS. S CHUTIA,MR. N J KHATANIAR

  2. 2.MRS SURANJANA SENAPATI

  3. 3.KABITA DEKA

  4. 4.SUMI SAIKIA

  5. 5.DHRUBAJYOTI CHETIA

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 01-Apr-2026

    Honourable Mr. Justice N. Unni Krishnan NairView PDF

    Summary: The Gauhati High Court case (Cont.Cas(C)/452/2025) involving assistant teacher Smti Anju Devi against government education officials was adjourned. The court found that service of notice upon respondents 2-5 was incomplete, though respondent 1's counsel appeared. The petitioner was directed to complete service of notice on remaining respondents within 2 working days, with the matter relisted after 4 weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 29-Aug-2025

    Honourable Mr. Justice Robin PhukanView PDF

  4. 20-Aug-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. Cont.Cas(C)/452/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Gauhati High Court case (Cont.Cas(C)/452/2025) involving assistant teacher Smti Anju Devi against government education officials was adjourned. The court found that service of notice upon respondents 2-5 was incomplete, though respondent 1's counsel appeared. The petitioner was directed to complete service of notice on remaining respondents within 2 working days, with the matter relisted after 4 weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case