Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010068112026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/1117/2026 JADAV BORA @ BORAH AND 10 ORS. S/O LT. BEPAI BORA, R/O DHUNAGURI KHANIKAR, P.O.- DHUNAGURI, P.S.- BIHPURIA, DIST- LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM- 787054 2: RIKU LAHON @ LAHAN S/O SUREN LAHON R/O LAHON GAON P.O.- BAHADURCHUCK P.S.- LAKHIMPUR DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM- 787031 3: BISWAJIT @ BISWAJEET HANDIQUE S/O HARI CHANDRA HANDIQUE R/O PANIGAON P.O.- PANIGAON P.S.- PANIGAON DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM- 787052 4: TAPAN KUMAR BORAH S/O SRI KANAK CHANDRA BORAH R/O SINGIMARI P.O.- BATGHARIA P.S.- DHEMAJI DIST- DHEMAJI ASSAM- 787057 5: SYED ZIYAUR RAHMAN S/O LATE SAHIDUR RAHMAN R/O SENSUA P.O.- ANGERKHOWA P.S.- PANIGAON DIST- LAKHIMPUR Page No.# 2/6 ASSAM- 787031 6: GOBINDA BONIA @ BANIA S/O SRI KAMAL BANIA R/O VILL- BHITORDALANI P.O.- DHOLPUR P.S.- BIHPURIA DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM- 784165 7: SIRAJUL ISLAM S/O MAJIBUR RAHMAN R/O NO. 2 DEJOO PATHAR P.O.- DEJOO TEA ESTATE DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM- 787031 8: MONTU KOCH @ MATO KONCH S/O LATE ANANDA KOCH R/O KATHPARA P.O.- BANMUKH P.S.- SIVASAGAR DIST- SIVASAGAR ASSAM- 785663 9: NIRUP BHUYAN S/O GAHIN BHUYAN R/O CHOWKHAMTING GAON P.O.- SISSIBORGAON P.S.- SILAPATHAR DIST- DHEMAJI ASSAM- 787110 10: BHUPEN HAZARIKA S/O SRI ANTIRAM HAZARIKA R/O CHAIBARI P.O.- BAKOLA P.S.- JAMUGURIHAT DIST- SONITPUR ASSAM- 784182 11: PRABIN @ PROBIN GOGOI S/O MR. PUWARAM GOGOI R/O DHALPUR HICHINGALIA P.O.- DHALPUR P.S.- BIHPURIA DIST- LAKHIMPUR ASSAM- 78416 Page No.# 3/6 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (A) DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006 2:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (A) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHAATI-781006 ASSAM 3:THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES HENGRABARI GUWAHATI-781036 ASSAM 4:THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES LAKHIMPUR NORTH LAKLHIMPUR ASSAM- 787001 5:THE SCREENING COMMITTEEE REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN (ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES) HENGRABARI GUWAHATI-78103 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B D KONWAR SR. ADV., MR P DOLEY,MR H AGARWAL,MRS J M KONWAR Advocate for the Respondent : SC, HEALTH, Page No.# 4/6 BEFORE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER 06-04-2026 (Arun Dev Choudhury, J) 1. We have heard Mr. H. Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard Ms. D. Borah, learned Standing Counsel for the Health Department. 2. The present Interlocutory Application has been filed by the applicants seeking condonation of the delay of 882 days in preferring the connected Writ Appeal against the common Judgment and Order dated 29.09.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 8999/2019 along with other connected cases. 3. By the aforesaid order, the learned Single Judge had dismissed the aforesaid writ petition upholding the termination order dated 05.11.2019 issued by the Joint Director of Health Services, North Lakhimpur. 4. In paragraph Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of this application, the applicants have cited the reasons for the delay in preferring the connected Writ Appeal. 5. Ms. D. Borah, learned Standing Counsel for the Health Department has not objected to the present application. Page No.# 5/6 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 7. The length of the delay is indeed a relevant factor to be considered when deciding an application for condonation of delay. However, when sufficient causes are shown, the discretion vested in the Courts to condone delay is to be exercised, though sufficient cause shall not mean a mere explanation given superficially. 8. In the case in hand, we have found that the applicants have sufficiently explained the reasons for the delay and has substantiated that, for reasons beyond their control, they were prevented from approaching the Court promptly and within the prescribed period of limitation. We do not see any negligence, lack of bona fide, or inaction on the part of the applicants and at the same time, the personal liberty of the applicants is to be examined in the connected appeal. 9. Based on the available materials, it cannot be said that the applicants were not diligent or that the delay was intentional. 10. Thus, having considered the explanation tendered by the applicants, this Court is satisfied that the delay occasioned in preferring the connected Writ Appeal was neither deliberate nor actuated by negligence but resulted from bona fide circumstances beyond the control of the applicants. In the absence of gross laches or mala fide intention attributable to the applicants, this Court would lean in favour of the adjudication on merits. Page No.# 6/6 11. In the given facts of the present case, the explanation furnished inspires confidence, and no prejudice is demonstrated to have been caused to the respondent by such delay. 12. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and having satisfied that the causes shown are sufficient to condone the delay of 882 days, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay. 13. The instant Interlocutory Application stands allowed and disposed of. 14. The Registry shall process the connected appeal and, if found defect-free, list it under the appropriate heading, preferably on 22.06.2026. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant