SHRI TANGMONG AND 13 ORS vs STATE OF NAGALAND AND 34 ORS Advocate - GOVT ADV NL — I.A.(Civil)/9/2026

Case under Xxxxx Section 000. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: GAHC020000242026

Filing Number

I.A.(Civil)/18/2026

Filing Date

21-Jan-2026

Registration No

I.A.(Civil)/9/2026

Registration Date

21-Jan-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kalyan Rai Surana , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kalyan Rai Surana , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

Bench Type

Division Bench

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 09-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Xxxxx Section 000

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHRI TANGMONG AND 13 ORS

    Adv. Z ZHIMOMI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF NAGALAND AND 34 ORS Advocate - GOVT ADV NL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kalyan Rai Surana,hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar SharmaView PDF

    Summary: The Gauhati High Court (Kohima Bench) allowed the interim application filed by Shri Tangmong and 13 others seeking deletion of their names (respondent nos. 22 and 33) from the connected writ appeal WA/44/2025. The court found that these respondents were inadvertently impleaded in the writ appeal despite being parties to another separate writ appeal. The application was allowed and disposed of accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-Feb-2026

    Orders

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Robin Phukan , Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Marli Vankung

  4. 28-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Robin Phukan,hon'ble Mrs. Justice Marli VankungView PDF

  5. 21-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. I.A.(Civil)/9/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Gauhati High Court (Kohima Bench) allowed the interim application filed by Shri Tangmong and 13 others seeking deletion of their names (respondent nos. 22 and 33) from the connected writ appeal WA/44/2025. The court found that these respondents were inadvertently impleaded in the writ appeal despite being parties to another separate writ appeal. The application was allowed and disposed of accordingly. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case