Writ petition filed by the minor son of an in-service policeman seeking compassionate appointment which was rejected by the District Level Committee on the ground that the application had lost its force due to the lapse of time.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010112752018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C) 3668/2018
1:RAM SHARAN SHYORAN
S/O. LT. HARDEV JAT, VILL. MAHASINGH, P.O. KUHARA, TEHSHIL VIRATNAGAR, DIST. JAIPUR, JARASTHAN,
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.
TO BE BY THE COMM. AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HOME DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI
2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM DR. B.K. KAKOTI ROAD ULUBARI GUWAHATI
3:THE DY. COMMISSIONER DHUBRI P.O. AND DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM
4:THE COMMANDANT 20ST ASSAM POLICE (IR) BATTALION PANBARI DHUBRI DIST. DHUBRI ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D HUSSAIN
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
ORDER
Date : 03-08-2018
Heard Mr. D. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Nath, learned counsel for the State respondents.
The petitioner’s prayer for appointment on compassionate basis having been rejected vide DLC meeting minutes dated 13/11/2017 on the ground that the petitioner’s application had lost its force, the petitioner has approached this Court.
The petitioner’s case is that his father died in harness on 06/07/2014 while working as a Havildar under the 20th Assam Police Bn. (IR). The petitioner, who was under-age, filed an application for compassionate appointment on 03/08/2014. The District Level Committee (DLC), which considered the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment in its meeting held on 30/12/2014, rejected the petitioner’s application on the ground that the petitioner was under-age. The DLC again considered the petitioner’s application on 26/05/2016, wherein the petitioner’s application was rejected on the ground that there was no vacancy available. There-after, the DLC again considered the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment on 13/11/2017 and rejected the same on the ground that the validity period of the petitioner’s application has already elapsed.
Petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner has also submitted a second application for compassionate appointment on 27/04/2017. As the petitioner’s application was rejected by the DLC meeting minutes dated 13/11/2017 on a technical ground, a direction should be issued to the authorities to decide the petitioner’s application afresh on merit.
Mr. D. Nath, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that as the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment had lost its force, there is no reason to allow the petitioner’s case to be re-considered by the DLC.
I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
It is an admitted fact that the petitioner submitted an application dated 03/08/2014 for compassionate appointment, while the petitioner was still a minor. Accordingly, it cannot be said that the application was a valid application. However, the DLC concerned had, in its second meeting held
Page No.# 3/3
on 26/05/2016, considered the petitioner’s application and rejected the same on the ground of there being no vacancy. This decision of the DLC dated 26/05/2016 has not been challenged or disputed by the petitioner till date.
As per the guidelines laid down by this Court in the case of Achyut Ranjan Das Vs. State of Assam and others, reported in (2006) 4 GLT 674, an application for compassionate appointment loses its force after two years of its submission. The petitioner having submitted his application on 03/08/2014, this Court does not find any infirmity in the decision of the DLC in rejecting the petitioner’s application on the ground that the validity period of the application was already over, as two years had elapsed.
In view of the reasons stated above, this Court does not find any merit in the writ petition. The same is accordingly dismissed.
JUDGE
Sukhamay
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a compassionate appointment application filed when the applicant was a minor loses its force after the expiry of two years as per court guidelines.
Whether the rejection of the petitioner's application on the ground that the validity period had elapsed is legally sustainable.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Achyut Ranjan Das Vs. State of Assam and othersApplied¶28
(2006) 4 GLT 674
RAM SHARAN SHYORAN
THE STATE OF ASSAM
MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
