Allowed

Sri Bijoy Chandra Nath v. the Director of Health Services

Gauhati HC15 Mar 2026I.A.(Civil)/3883/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interlocutory application seeking impleadment of the Director of Health Services, Assam in a writ petition over medical reimbursement, the entitlement having been fixed by his admissibility report. The Court held him a necessary and proper party and permitted impleading him as respondent no.4.

What did the court decide?

Director of Health Services, Assam permitted to be impleaded as party respondent no.4 in WP(C) No.5210/2025.

Sri Bijoy Chandra Nath Vs the Director of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010255722025

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/3883/2025

¶6

SRI BIJOY CHANDRA NATH

¶7

SON OF LATE ISSARAM NATH, RESIDENT OF JATIA JANAKPUR PATH P.O.DISPUR, PIN-781005, DISPUR, DIST- KAMRUP M, ASSAM

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES ASSAM, HENGRABARI, GUWAHATI-781036.

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M SARMA,

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU, SC, HEALTH

¶12

Page No.# 2/3

¶13

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Date : 16.03.2026

¶16

Heard Mr. R. Gohain, learned counsel, appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. Mr. D. Upamanyu, learned Standing Counsel, Health & Family Welfare Department.

¶17

2. The applicant, herein, had instituted the connected writ petition being WP(C).No.5210/2025, inter alia, praying for a direction upon the respondent authorities to release an amount of Rs.15,75,969.95/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Seventy Five Thousand Nine Hundred Sixty Nine and Ninety Five Paise) only towards his medical re-imbursement bill. The respondent authorities, however, basing on an admissibility report given by the Director of Health Services, Assam, had held that the petitioner would be entitled only to an amount of Rs.10,58,910/-(Rupees Ten Lakhs Fifty Eight Thousand Nine Hundred Ten).

¶18

3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that inadvertently the Director to Health Services, Assam, was not impleaded as a party respondent in the proceedings of WP(C).No.5210/2025 due to inadvertence. He submits that the entitlement of the petitioner for re-imbursement of his medical bills being now based on the admissibility reports submitted by the Director of Health Services, the Director of Health Services, Assam, is a necessary party in the connected writ petition and accordingly, the present interlocutory application has been filed for impleading the said authority as a party respondent in the connected writ petition.

¶19

4. Mr. D. Upamanyu, submits that the admissibility report having already been contended to have been submitted by the Director of Health Services, Assam, the Director of Health Services, Assam is no longer a necessary party in the connected writ petition and the matter is now required to be processed by the administrative department i.e. the Education Department.

¶20

Page No.# 3/3

¶21

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.

¶22

6. The petitioner having claimed an amount of Rs.15,75,969.95/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Seventy Five Thousand Nine Hundred Sixty Nine and Ninety Five Paise) as his medical bill re-imbursement and the eligibility of the petitioner being determined at an amount of Rs.10,58,910/-(Rupees Ten Lakhs Fifty Eight Thousand Nine Hundred Ten) basing on the admissibility reports submitted in the matter by the Director of Health Services, Assam, this Court is of the considered view that the Director of Health Services is a necessary and proper party in the connected writ petition.

¶23

7. In view of the above conclusion reached by this Court, the present Interlocutory Application stands allowed permitting the petitioner to implead “the Director of Health Services, Assam, Hengrabari, Guwahati-781036”, as party respondent no.4 in WP(C).No.5210/2025.

¶24

8. With the above observations and directions, the present Interlocutory Application stands disposed of.

¶25

JUDGE

¶26

Comparing Assistant

Sri Bijoy Chandra Nath v. the Director of Health Services

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Bijoy Chandra Nath v. the Director of Health Services

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aminul Hoque Laskar Vs the Union of India and 8 Ors.

Sri Amrit Chandra Das Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Lachit Borah Alias Lachit Bora Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Hiteswar Sarmah Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Azad Ali Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Lalchand Ali and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.