National Health Mission Employees Association, Assam and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010118702015

¶3

undefined

¶4

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/4225/2015

¶6

NATIONAL HEALTH MISSION EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, ASSAM and 2 ORS

¶7

ASSAM, ROOM NO.3, GROUND FLOOR, GATE NO.3, OPP. N.F. RLY., HEAD QRT., MALIGAON, GHY-01, DIST- KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM, REP. BY

¶8

2: DR. NABA JYOTI NATH PRESIDENT NATIONAL HEALTH MISSION EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION S/O KANTI RAM NATH RUPALIM PATH W/NO.4 DIST- GOLAGHAT-785612 ASSAM

¶9

3: HIRU KALITA GENERAL SECY. NATIONAL HEALTH MISSION EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION S/O MANESWAR KALITA BEHORBARI CHARI ALI SONKUCHI PATH P.O. BASISTHA DIST- KAMRUP METRO ASSA

¶10

VERSUS

¶11

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HEALTH AND F.W. DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6, ASSAM

¶12

2:THE MISSION DIRECTOR NATIONAL HEALTH MISSION

¶13

Page No.# 2/5

¶14

ASSAM SAIKIA COMMERCIAL COMPLEX NEAR POST OFFICE BUS STAND CHRISTIANBASTI GHY-5 ASSAM 3:THE DIRECTOR FINANCE and ACCOUNTS NATIONAL HEALTH MISSION ASSAM SAIKIA COMMERCIAL COMPLEX NEAR POST OFFICE BUS STAND CHRISTIANBASTI GHY-5 ASSAM 4:THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY MINISTRY OF HEALTH and F.W. NIRMAN BHAWAN NEW DELHI-

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. I AHMED, MD. GIASH UDDIN,MR. D DAS,MR. M RAHMAN

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : C.G.C., MR. B CHAKRAVARTY(R-4),MS. M DUTTA (R-6),MS. T BEGUM (R-1),SC, FINANCE (R-2-3),SC, HEALTH (R-1),ASSTT. S.G.I.(R-4),MR. K K NANDI (SC, ESIC),MR. P K ROY (R-6),MS. A CHAKRABORTY (R-6),MR. B GOGOI (SC, HEALTH DEPT.(R-2))

¶17

Linked Case : I.A./954/2016

¶18

NATIONAL HEALTH MISSION EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION ASSAM and 2 ORS

¶19

VERSUS

¶20

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

¶21

Page No.# 3/5

¶22

-----------Advocate for : MR.D DAS

¶23

Advocate for : MR.K K NANDIR-1 appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

¶24

BEFORE

¶25

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR

¶26

ORDER

¶27

10/02/2026

¶28

Heard Mr. I Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3; Mr. M Smith, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 5 and Mr. P K Roy, learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondent No. 6.

¶29

2. The petitioners by way of instituting the present proceedings have prayed for extending the coverage of the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme to the employees working under the control of the State Mission Director, National Health Mission. The petitioners have also prayed for a direction for extending the coverage under the Employers State Insurance Scheme to the employees of the National Health Mission.

¶30

3. At the outset, Mr. I Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that he would not press the prayer made in the writ petition with regard to extension of coverage under the Employers State Insurance Scheme to the employees working in the National Health Mission and would only press the present writ petition to the extent of providing coverage under the Employees’ Provident Fund to the employees working in the National Health Mission.

¶31

4. Mr. B Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, by referring to the affidavit filed in the matter has submitted that the employees working in the National Health Mission

¶32

Page No.# 4/5

¶33

and drawing salaries up to Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) per month, have already been brought under the coverage of the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme. The Employees’ Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 having required the extension of the benefit under the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme to all the employees working in an organization and drawing salaries up to the limit of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand), the National Health Mission authorities are found to have complied with the provisions of the Act of 1952.

¶34

5. Mr. I Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners, at this stage, has submitted that the Employees Provident Fund Scheme is also required to be extended to all other employees, who are also drawing monthly wages above Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand).

¶35

6. Responding to the said query, Mr. B Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam has submitted that a proposal in this connection is already finalized and the same is placed before the Central Government for its approval. He submits that in the event the Central Government approves the said proposal, the benefits under the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme would also be extended to the other employees, who are presently drawing their wages above Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand).

¶36

7. In view of the said developments, Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present writ petition be closed with liberty to the petitioners to file a fresh writ petition in the event the proposal now under consideration by the Central Government for extension of the benefits under the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme to all employees, drawing salaries above Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) per month working in the National Health Mission, is not taken to its logical conclusion.

¶37

8. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that no further live issues arises for consideration in the present writ petition and accordingly, the present writ petition stands closed.

¶38

9. It is provided that the petitioners would be at liberty to institute a fresh proceeding with regard to the coverage of the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme to the persons drawing salaries above Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) working in the National Health

¶39

Page No.# 5/5

¶40

Mission Organization, in the event the proposal submitted by the authorities of the National Health Mission, Assam to the Central Government is not favourably considered.

¶41

JUDGE

¶42

Comparing Assistant

National Health Mission Employees Association, Assam and 2 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

National Health Mission Employees Association, Assam and 2 Ors. v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

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

Dip Kumar Medhi Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Uttam Das Vs the State of Assam and Othrs

Biocare Associates Vs the State of Assam

M/S Jayanta Kumar Ghosh Outdoor Catering Private Ltd. and Anr. Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Dhanada Das and 5 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Sambhu Charan Barman Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.