Disposed

Bijoy Rabha v. Bharat Kumar Vaishnav and Ors.

Gauhati HC10 Mar 2026I.A.(Civil)/518/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interlocutory application in a contempt case seeking impleadment of three CRPF and government officials as party respondents for alleged non-compliance with an order directing payment of revised pay scale. The court permitted impleadment without notice and directed filing of amended cause title.

What did the court decide?

Impleadment permitted; petitioner to file amended cause title within one week; matter to be relisted.

Bijoy Rabha Vs Bharat Kumar Vaishnav and Ors. — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010033912026

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/518/2026

¶6

BIJOY RABHA

¶7

S/O-LATE LOHIT RABHA, R/O- VILL AND P.O. -MESKA PUKHURI, P.S. -KALAIGAON DISTRICT- UDALGURI, BTAD, ASSAM, PIN-784521

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

BHARAT KUMAR VAISHNAV AND ORS THE COMMANDANT, 142 BN., CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE, JONAKI NAGAR, GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN-785621

¶10

2:SRI GOVIND MOHAN

¶11

THE SECRETARY GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI 110003

¶12

3:SHRI GYANENDRA PRATAP SINGH IPS DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CRPF LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI 110003

¶13

4:SRI MOHINDER KUMAR THE COMMANDANT 142 BN. CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE JONAKI NAGAR GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN-78562

¶14

Page No.# 2/4

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS T WAPANGLA,

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : ,

¶17

Linked Case : Cont.Cas(C)/58/2025

¶18

BIJOY RABHA S/O-LATE LOHIT RABHA R/O- VILL AND P.O. -MESKA PUKHURI P.S. -KALAIGAON DISTRICT- UDALGURI BTAD ASSAM PIN-784521

¶19

VERSUS BHARAT KUMAR VAISHNAV THE COMMANDANT 142 BN. CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE JONAKI NAGAR GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN-785621

¶20

-----------Advocate for : MR. R MAZUMDAR Advocate for : appearing for BHARAT KUMAR VAISHNAV

¶21

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

¶22

ORDER

¶23

11.03.2026

¶24

Heard Ms. T. Wapangla learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶25

2. This Interlocutory Application has been filed, seeking impleadment of

¶26

Page No.# 3/4

¶27

Opposite parties No. 2,3 and 4.

¶28

3. According to the petitioner/applicant, these Respondents are necessary to be impleaded as they are presently holding the post and the directions contained in the order dated 27.03.2024 passed in WP(C) No. 411 of 2023 has still not been complied with.

¶29

4. Considering the submissions made, this Court is of the view that at this stage the prayer made for impleadment can be permitted without issuing notice, as the opposite parties saught to be impleaded will have their opportunity of filing their counter in the Contempt Case as upon being impleaded.

¶30

5. The Contempt case is filed alleging wilful disobedience of the directions contained in the order dated 27.03.2024, passed in WP(C) 411/2023, whereby the writ petition was disposed of, directing that the petitioner should be paid is the revised pay scale as per the entitlement which the Court has concluded, that the petitioner is entitled to in the order dated 27.03.2024 passed in WP(C) No. 411/2023.

¶31

6. In the present Contempt Petition, although the commandant was arrayed as a party, the other Respondents including the Secretary to the Government of India, Director General CRPF and Commandant 142 Battalion CRPF stationed in Golaghat, who were also Respondents in WP(C) No. 411/2023 were not arrayed as party respondents in the contempt petition. Accordingly, this Interlocutory Application has been filed.

¶32

7. In view of the order passed today in Interlocutory Application No. 518 of 2026, the applicants have been permitted to join as party respondents in the Contempt Petition No. 58 of 2025. The petitioner is directed to file amended cause title within a period of 1 week from today.

¶33

8. Thereafter, the Registry shall list the matter accordingly.

¶34

Page No.# 4/4

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

Comparing Assistant

Bijoy Rabha v. Bharat Kumar Vaishnav and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bijoy Rabha v. Bharat Kumar Vaishnav and Ors.

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

Raja Rai @ Rajnarayan Rai Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Abdul Wahab Vs J. B. Ekka and 5 Ors.

Paresh Kumar Sahu Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Mrinal Kalita and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Aparajita Changkakati Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Gazi Rahman Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.