SHRI TANGMONG AND 13 ORS vs STATE OF NAGALAND AND 32 ORS Advocate - GOVT ADV NL — WA/44/2025
Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Next hearing: 13th May 2026.
CNR: GAHC020008342025
Filing Number
WA/629/2025
Filing Date
04-Dec-2025
Registration No
WA/44/2025
Registration Date
04-Dec-2025
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manish Choudhury , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pranjal Das
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manish Choudhury , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pranjal Das
Bench Type
Division Bench
Category
10237 - Writ Appeals under the Gauhati High Court Rules. ( 204 )
Judicial Branch
Civil Section
Last updated 09-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SHRI TANGMONG AND 13 ORS
Adv. Z. ZHIMOMI,ZUCHAMO Y KIKON,ZUCHAMO Y KIKON, ,TOSHI O. LONGKUMER,KUPULI SWU,LOVIKATO SWU,NEWTON ZHIMOMI,ZUCHAMO Y KIKON
-
2.SMTI. VIKETOUNUO KIRE
-
3.SHRI ACHUM NGULLIE,
-
4.SMTI. LANUYANGLA,
-
5.SMTI. TEMJENINLA AIER
-
6.SMTI. NANGSHIENLA AIER
-
7.SMTI. KHUMDIBILA SANGTAM
-
8.SMTI. SENSONARO LONGCHAR
-
9.SMTI. KEDUONEINUO SOLO
-
10.SMTI. ONENTILA LONGKUMER
-
11.SHRI THEJAVICHUCHA
-
12.SMTI. RITE-U T MERO
-
13.SMTI. ARHONI
-
14.SMTI NECULU CHUZHO,
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF NAGALAND AND 32 ORS Advocate - GOVT ADV NL
-
2.THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY,
-
3.THE DIRECTOR,
-
4.SMT. SENTIRENLA JAMIR
-
5.SMT. SERILA L SANGTAM
-
6.SMT. TITHUVINANUKHU
-
7.SHRI CHAMDIBASANGTAM
-
8.SHRI ZHOVIDEUKHRU
-
9.SHRI CHOTHAYOTO ROTE
-
10.SHRI. YANYAK
-
11.SHRI WEDETE KAPFO
-
12.SMTI. KEKHRISENOU USOU
-
13.SMTI. KEVILEVONOU MONICA KEZIEO
-
14.SHRI LITSAPI C. SANGTAM
-
15.SHRI ISAAC SHUPAO
-
16.SHRI DIKHROU DIANU
-
17.SHRI W. WANGJIN
-
18.SMTI. OLIVI YEPTHOMI
-
19.SHRI ZHOSATO KAPU
-
20.SHRI VIRETA LEA
-
21.SHRI MUDANG KHIAMNUINGAN
-
22.SMTI. GRACE SEMP
-
23.SMTI. SANO KOZA
-
24.SMTI. KANGYICHULE HEGUL
-
25.SHRI RHIRHI
-
26.SMTI. LIPOKJUNGLA
-
27.SMTI. EKONBENI M. TSANGLAO
-
28.SMTI. LOVIKALI H. AYEMI
-
29.SMTI. TONGHON PHOM
-
30.SMTI. KHRUTALU DOMEH,
-
31.SMTI. MHASINUO RIO
-
32.SMTI IMNATULA KECHULAR
-
33.THE SECRETARY
Case History
-
13-May-2026
Next hearingPending
-
13-May-2026
Admission
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kalyan Rai Surana , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar Sharma
-
06-May-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kalyan Rai Surana,hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Kumar SharmaView PDF
Case Summary: WA/44/2025 Case: Writ Appeal (WA) 44/2025, Gauhati High Court, Kohima Bench Parties: 14 petitioners (led by Shri Tangmong and including Smti. Viketounuo Kire and Shri Achum Ngullie) vs. State of Nagaland and 34 others Order Date: 06-05-2026 Outcome: The matter was adjourned for one week. The court noted procedural defects in service of notice—specifically that notices were not properly served on respondent nos. 9, 22, 33, 34, and 35 despite a prior order dated 10.12.2025 mandating service by newspaper publication. The court also struck off respondent nos. 22 and 33 via a connected application. Counsel for appellants was granted time to address the court regarding the non-service issues. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
11-Feb-2026
Admission
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manish Choudhury , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Budi Habung
-
04-Feb-2026
Orders
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Robin Phukan , Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Marli Vankung
-
28-Jan-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Robin Phukan,hon'ble Mrs. Justice Marli VankungView PDF
-
10-Dec-2025
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manish Choudhury,hon'ble Mr. Justice Budi HabungView PDF
-
10-Dec-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
05-Dec-2025
Hon'ble The Chief Justice,hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Dev ChoudhuryView PDF
-
04-Dec-2025
Case filed
Registration No. WA/44/2025
Case Summary: WA/44/2025 Case: Writ Appeal (WA) 44/2025, Gauhati High Court, Kohima Bench Parties: 14 petitioners (led by Shri Tangmong and including Smti. Viketounuo Kire and Shri Achum Ngullie) vs. State of Nagaland and 34 others Order Date: 06-05-2026 Outcome: The matter was adjourned for one week. The court noted procedural defects in service of notice—specifically that notices were not properly served on respondent nos. 9, 22, 33, 34, and 35 despite a prior order dated 10.12.2025 mandating service by newspaper publication. The court also struck off respondent nos. 22 and 33 via a connected application. Counsel for appellants was granted time to address the court regarding the non-service issues. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts