The Union of India v. Kalpana Hazarika

Gauhati HC8 Apr 2025I.A.(Civil)/641/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay; Section 5 Limitation Act 1963; 795 days; 797 days; writ appeal; impugned order of learned Single Judge; Gauhati High Court; I.A.(Civil) 642/2025; I.A.(Civil) 641/2025; I.A.(Civil) 1085/2025; Lokopriya Gopinath Bordoloi Regional Institute of Mental Health Tezpur; Union of India Ministry of Health and Family Welfare; Comptroller and Auditor General of India; Tilottoma Brahma; Kalpana Hazarika; Purnima Narzary; 09.04.2025; Vijay Bishnoi CJ; N. Unni Krishnan Nair.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 795 days and 797 days, respectively, occasioned in preferring the connected writ appeals condoned; Registry directed to register the connected writ appeals immediately. ¶¶45

The Union of India Vs Kalpana Hazarika — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Delay of 795 days and 797 days, respectively, occasioned in preferring the connected writ appeals condoned; Registry directed to register the connected writ appeals immediately.

¶¶45

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay of 795 days and 797 days, respectively, occasioned in preferring the connected writ appeals should be condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. +1 more

¶¶42

Court's answer

The interlocutory applications I.A.(Civil) No.642/2025, I.A.(Civil) No.641/2025 and I.A.(Civil) No.1085/2025 are allowed and the delay of 795 days and 797 days, respectively, occasioned in preferring the connected writ appeals is condoned.

¶¶45

Ratio / Principle

Condonation was granted on the basis that delay had already been condoned in several other writ appeals filed against the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, a fact which learned counsel for the non-applicants was not in a position to dispute.

¶¶44

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (coram: the Chief Justice, Vijay Bishnoi, CJ, and Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair), decision dated 09.04.2025, allowed three interlocutory applications — I.A.(Civil) Nos. 642/2025, 641/2025 and 1085/2025 — preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 by the Union of India (Ministry of Health and Family Welfare), the Director and the Administrative Officer of Lokopriya Gopinath Bordoloi Regional Institute of Mental Health, Tezpur, praying condonation of delays of 795 days and 797 days, respectively, occasioned in preferring writ appeals against an order passed by the learned Single Judge. Condonation rested on the Court's notice that delay had already been condoned in several other writ appeals against the same impugned order, a fact learned counsel for the non-applicants (Tilottoma Brahma, Kalpana Hazarika, Purnima Narzary and the Comptroller and Auditor General of India) could not dispute. The Registry was directed to register the connected writ appeals immediately.

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010274022024

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/642/2025

¶6

1.THE UNION OF INDIA

¶7

THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE, NEW DELHI

¶8

2: THE DIRECTOR, LOKOPRIYA GOPINATH BORDOLOI REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH TEZPUR SONITPUR ASSAM 784001

¶9

3: THE ADMINISTRITATIVE OFFICER,

¶10

LOKOPRIYA GOPINATH BORDOLOI REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH TEZPUR SONITPUR ASSAM 78400

¶11

VERSUS

¶12

1.TILLOTTOMA BRAHMA

¶13

W/O KULDIP BASUMATARY, D/O SACHINDRA NATH BRAHMA, RESIDENT OF C./O LOKOPRIYA GOPINATH BORDOLOI REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH, TEZPUR, SONITPUR, ASSAM 784001

¶14

2:THE COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA CAG DEEN DAYAL UPADHAYA MARG NEW DELHI 11012

¶15

Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/641/2025

¶16

1.THE UNION OF INDIA

¶17

THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE NEW DELHI

¶18

2: THE DIRECTOR, LOKOPRIYA GOPINATH BORDOLOI REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH TEZPUR SONITPUR ASSAM 784001

¶19

3: THE ADMINISTRITATIVE OFFICER LOKOPRIYA GOPINATH BORDOLOI REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL

¶20

Page No.# 2/3

¶21

HEALTH TEZPUR SONITPUR ASSAM 784001

¶22

VERSUS

¶23

1.KALPANA HAZARIKA W/O ACHYUT BORAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SANTIBAN DEWRIGAON PO KETEKIBARI DIST SONITPUR ASSAM 784001

¶24

2:THE COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA CAG DEEN DAYAL UPADHAYA MARG NEW DELHI 110124

¶25

Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/1085/2025

¶26

1.THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE NEW DELHI

¶27

2: THE DIRECTOR, LOKOPRIYA GOPINATH BORDOLOI REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH, TEZPUR DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM PIN784001

¶28

3: THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

¶29

LOKOPRIYA GOPINATH BORDOLOI REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH TEZPUR DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM PIN-784001.

¶30

VERSUS

¶31

1.PURNIMA NARZARY W/O. LT. GOKUL DEORI R/O. LOKOPRIYA GOPINATH BORDOLOI REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH TEZPUR-784001 DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM

¶32

2:THE COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIACAG DEEN DAYAL UPADHAYA MARG NEW DELHI-110124.

¶33

For the Applicant(s) : Mr. A.K. Dutta, Central Government Counsel.

¶34

: Mr. S. Sutradhar, Advocate.

¶35

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B.D. Das, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. S.C. Biswas, Advocate for respondent No.1.

¶36

: Mr. R.K. Talukdar, Standing Counsel, CAG for respondent No.2.

¶37

Page No.# 3/3

¶38

– BEFORE –

¶39

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

¶40

09.04.2025

¶41

(Vijay Bishnoi, CJ)

¶42

These Interlocutory Applications [I.A.(Civil) No.642/2025, I.A.(Civil) No.641/2025 and I.A.(Civil) No. 1085/2025] are preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, on behalf of the applicants, with the prayer to condone the delay of 795 days and 797 days, respectively, occasioned in preferring the connected writ appeals.

¶43

It is noticed that against the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, several writ appeals were also filed with delay and this Court was pleased to condone the delay in those cases.

¶44

Learned counsel appearing for the non-applicants in the above referred Interlocutory Applications are not in a position to dispute the said fact.

¶45

In such circumstances, these interlocutory Applications [I.A.(Civil) No.642/2025, I.A.(Civil) No.641/2025 and I.A.(Civil) No. 1085/2025] are allowed and the delay of 795 days and 797 days, respectively, occasioned in preferring the connected writ appeals, are condoned.

¶46

The Interlocutory Applications are disposed of accordingly.

¶47

Registry is directed to register the connected writ appeals immediately.

¶48

JUDGE

¶49

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶50

Comparing Assistant

The Union of India v. Kalpana Hazarika

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Union of India v. Kalpana Hazarika

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Padma Dhar Das Vs Mamata Hojai

The Director (Commercial and Hrd), Wapco Ltd. and Anr. Vs Baijayanta Bhattacharjee and 3 Ors.

Arun Narzary Vs the Bodoland Territorial Council and 4 Ors.

The State of Assam and Anr. Vs Abdul Alim Khan and 2 Ors.

The State of Assam Vs Abdul Alim Khan

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. and 3 Ors. Vs Rajib Hazarika and Anr.