Gauhati High Court
IA(C)/200/2026 of Bamar Yinyo Vs Amjad Tak and Anr on 27 September 2026
GAHC040014312026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : IA(C)/200/2026 Bamar Yinyo Son of Shi Damba Yinyo, resident of Village Belo, PO Yomcha, PS Yomcha, West Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh and presently residing at
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC040014312026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
(ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : IA(C)/200/2026
Bamar Yinyo
Son of Shi Damba Yinyo, resident of Village Belo, PO Yomcha, PS Yomcha, West Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh and presently residing at Itanagar, PO and PS
Itanagar, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh.
VERSUS
Amjad Tak and Anr
Commissioner and Secretary, Department of Education, Govt of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar, 791111
2:Kanto Danggen
Age: 0
Occupation :
Commissioner and Secretary
Department of Education
Govt of Arunachal Pradesh
Itanagar 79111
Advocate for the Petitioner : Dusu Rillung, Advocate for the Respondent : Taba Tagum, BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 28.09.2026
Heard Mr. A. K. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the applicant through RVC, who submits that by filing this application, the applicant seeks Page No.# 2/2 impleadment of Sri Kanto Danggen who is the present incumbent holding the post of Commissioner and Secretary, Department of Education, Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh as respondent No.2 since the earlier incumbent has been replaced by him. He submits that impleadment of the said person is necessary for effective compliance of the Court’s direction. Mr. L. Tikhak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. T. Tagum, who represents respondent No.1 has no objection to the prayer. In view of above, application for impleadment as prayed for is hereby allowed. I.A. stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant