Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010133692024 2025:GAU-AS:4764 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP(IO)/246/2024 BISWAJIT DEWRI SON OF LATE JAYRAM DEWRI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- TORABORI TUP, P.O. JALUGUTI, MOUZA- BARAPUJIA, P.S. RAHA, DISTRICT- NAGAON, ASSAM, 782001 VERSUS BARNALI BORDOLOI WIFE OF SRI BISWAJIT DEWRI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- NIBUKALI, P.O. NIBUKALI, P.S. NAGAON (SADAR), ASSAM For the petitioner (s) : Mr. K. Baruah, Advocate For the respondent (s) : Ms. M. D. Medhi, Advocate BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH O R D E R 21.04.2025 Heard Mr. K. Baruah, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Ms. M. D. Medhi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent. Page No.# 2/3 2. The petitioner has approached this Court by invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court challenging the order dated 01.12.2023 passed in Misc.(J) Case No.8/2021 whereby the learned Court of the District Judge, Nagaon vide the impugned order had directed the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month to the respondent herein towards maintenance, pendente lite and litigation expenses. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the respondent herein is a government servant, and as such, the question of making payment of maintenance, pendente lite as well as litigation expenses as directed by the learned Court of the District Judge, Nagaon is not proper. 4. Ms. M. D. Medhi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent herein submits that out of the wedlock, there are two children who are studying in private schools and the respondent is the only one who is bearing the entire expenditure for their education and other requirements. 5. This Court having taken into account the materials on record is of the opinion that the imposition of the amount of Rs.10,000/- vide the impugned order dated 01.12.2023 in Misc.(J) Case No.8/2021 upon the petitioner by the learned Court of the District Judge, Nagaon does not appear to be erroneous requiring interference by this Court. Page No.# 3/3 6. However, it is the opinion of this Court that the said amount of Rs.10,000/- which the petitioner is directed to pay shall be used only for the purpose of the needs of the children of the petitioner and the respondent. 7. In view of the above, the instant petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant