If you just combine them as you described (called a "mixture"), the resulting mixed sample (of size $n_1+n_2$) will not have any known, predictable distribution. Take the case of $n$ samples from $N(-10,1)$ and $n$ from $N(10,1)$, you will have a sample from a symmetrical bimodal distribution; definitively not normal. If instead you take $n$ from $N(0,100)$ and $N(0,1)$ you have a sample from a symmetrical unimodal distribution, but with a narrow and tall "hump" superimposed on a wide and shallow "hump"; very non normal. If you mix $2n$ values from $N(0,1)$ with $n$ values from $N(2,1)$, your mixed data will now come from a skewed distribution; very non-normal.
Now, your mixed sample will have for a mean the "mixture" of the sample means, as you indicated in the question (for estimation of the mean -first order approximation-, you can replace all the sample values by $n$ values at the mean). But the variance of the mixed sample will not at all look like your formula (mixing $N(-100,1)$ and $N(100,1)$ will obviously have a much larger variance than mixing $N(-1,1)$ and $N(1,1)$). And mixing $N(0,1)$ and $N(0,1)$ will still have a variance of 1, regardless of the mixing ratio...
Bottom line: no, the mixture of 2 normal distributions is not normal, the mean of the mixture will be the mixture of the means, but the variance of the mixture will not be at all the mixture of the variances.