Hem Chandra Sarma and Anr. Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Hem Chandra Sarma and Anr. Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief granted by the Court; the writ petition was closed as infructuous since the relief sought had already been granted by the respondent authority (certificate dated 21.05.2026, marked as Document X).

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should direct the appointment of petitioner No. 1 (Shri Hem Chandra Sarma) as limited guardian for petitioner No. 2 (Sri Dipankar Sarma), who is stated to be in a state of incapacity or disability due to brain stroke/attack and unable to use his intellect, converse, take just decisions and sign documents.

Court's answer

This writ petition has become infructuous and accordingly stands closed, as the relief sought for (appointment of petitioner No. 1 as limited guardian of petitioner No. 2) has already been granted by the respondent authority.

Key takeaways

A copy of the certificate dated 21.05.2026 (granting the limited guardianship) is marked as Document X.¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court, WP(C)/1118/2026 (Honourable Mr. Justice Kardak Ete), Order dated 08.06.2026: Petitioners Hem Chandra Sarma (father) and Dipankar Sarma (son) prayed for a direction appointing the father as limited guardian of the son, who was stated to be in a state of incapacity or disability due to brain stroke/attack, unable to use his intellect, converse, take just decisions or sign documents. At the hearing, learned State Counsel (Mr. B. J. Talukdar) placed a certificate dated 21.05.2026 showing that the respondent authority had already granted petitioner No. 1 limited guardianship of petitioner No. 2, and it was submitted at the Bar that the writ petition had become infructuous. The Court accordingly ordered that the writ petition stand closed as infructuous, the relief sought having already been granted by the respondent authority, and marked a copy of the certificate dated 21.05.2026 as Document X. No statute or precedent was invoked; no substantive relief was granted by the Court.

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010017782026

undefined

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

Case No. : WP(C)/1118/2026

HEM CHANDRA SARMA AND ANR

SON OF LATE BRAJA NATH SARMA, RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO.263, MALAY NAGAR, PWD CHOWK, NEAR AEC CAMPUS, P.O AND P.S.- JALUKBARI, GUWAHATI-781013, DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM.

2: DIPANKAR SARMA SON OF SRI HEM CHANDRA SARMA RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 263 MALAY NAGAR PWD CHOWK NEAR AEC CAMPUS P.O AND P.S.- JALUKBARI GUWAHATI- 781013 DISTRICT-KAMRUP (M) ASSAM

VERSUS

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, GOVT. OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT, SHASTRI BHAWAN, C-WING, DR. RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD, NEW DELHI- 110011.

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006.

3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY /PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 6.

Page No.# 2/3

4:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES OFFICE OF THE JOINT DIRECTOR HEALTH SERVICES CHATPUKHURI UZANBAZAR GUWAHATI KAMRUP M. 5:ASSAM STATE LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY ADJACENT TO GAUHATI HIGH COURT NEW BUILDING GUWAHATI- 781001. 6:THE CHAIRMAN DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE CUM JOINT DIRECTOR HEALTH SERVICES CHATPUKHURI UZANBAZAR GUWAHATI-01 KAMRUP (M) ASSAM. 7:PURABI SARMAH WIFE OF SHRI. DIPANKAR SARMA DAUGHTER OF SACHIN SARMAH RESIDENT OF PACHARIA BARHMONTOL NEAR KALI MANDIR P.O.- PACHARIA P.S.- HAJO PIN- 781104 DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PH. NO.- 9957977320. 8:DISTRICT COMMISSIONER DISTRICT COMMISSIONER-CUM-CHAIRMAN LOCAL LEVEL COMMITTEE LICHUBAGAN HENGRABARI GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN-781036

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S P DAS, MR. ANGSHUMAN DEKA,MS C BORA,MS. S BAISHYA

Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MS. S BHUYAN(R7),MS. C SHARMA(R7),SC, HEALTH AND F W,GA, ASSAM

Page No.# 3/3

BEFORE

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE

ORDER

Date : 08.06.2026

Heard Mr. S. P. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. J. Talukdar, learned State Counsel for the respondent No. 8. Also heard Ms. S. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Health and Family Welfare Department for the respondent Nos. 3, 4 & 6 and Ms. S. Bhuyan, learned counsel for the respondent No. 7.

By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to appoint the petitioner No. 1, Shri Hem Chandra Sarma, as a limited guardian for his son, i.e. the petitioner No. 2 (Sri Dipankar Sarma), on account of the petitioner No. 2 being in the state of incapacity or disability due to brain stroke/attack and is unable to use his intellect, converse, take just decision and sign various documents.

Mr. B. J. Talukdar, learned State Counsel by placing a copy of the certificate dated 21.05.2026 submits that the petitioner No. 1 has already been granted the limited guardianship of the petitioner No. 2.

In view of the above, it is submitted at that Bar that the writ petition has become infructuous.

Accordingly, this writ petition stands closed as infructuous, as the relief sought for has already been granted by the respondent authority.

A copy of the certificate dated 21.05.2026 is hereby marked as Document X.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant