Allowed

Nalini Chetia v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC1 Aug 2018WP(C)/4187/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition addressed a delay in considering an application for compassionate appointment following the death-in-harness of the petitioner's father. The court directed respondents to place the file with the District Level Committee based on party consent and government guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to place the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment before the concerned District Level Committee for consideration.

Nalini Chetia Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010136082018

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 4187/2018

¶5

1:NALINI CHETIA

¶6

S/O- LATE PHANI CHETIA, R/O- VILL- BORDOLONI DIHINGIAGAON, P.OBORDILONI, P.S- GOGAMUKH, DIST- DHEMAJI, ASSAM, PIN-

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS

¶9

REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, WATER RESOURCE DEPTT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 781006

¶10

2:THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006

¶11

3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER WATER RESOURCES DEPTT CHANDMARI GUWAHATI- 3 DIST- KAMRUP(M) ASSAM

¶12

4:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DHEMAJI WATER RESOURCES DIVISION DHEMAJI DIST- KAMRUP(M) ASSAM

¶13

5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM CHAIRMAN DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE DHEMAJI DIST- DHEMAJI ASSA

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A KHANIKAR

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Date : 01-08-2018

¶20

Heard Mr. A. Khanikar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.S. Roy, learned Government Advocate, Assam, appearing for respondent nos. 2 and 5 and Mr. P. Kakati, learned counsel for Water Resources Department, representing respondent nos. 1, 3 and 4.

¶21

The petitioner's case, in brief, is that his father died in harness on 27/06/2006 while working in the office of the Executive Engineer under the Water Resources Division, Dhemaji as Section Assistant. The petitioner there-after, filed application for compassionate appointment. The petitioner's application for compassionate appointment was forwarded by the Executive Engineer, Dhemaji, Water Resources Division to the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department vide letter No. FA-8/81/Pt-iv/04/4278 dated 07/12/2006.

¶22

The petitioner's counsel submits that despite the application for compassionate appointment having been forwarded to the authorities, the petitioner's case has not been placed before the District Level Committee (DLC) for its consideration till date. He accordingly, prays for a direction upon the respondents to place the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment before the DLC for its consideration.

¶23

Counsels for the respondents submit that they do not have any objection to the prayer made by the petitioner's counsel, provided the petitioner's application has not been considered and rejected earlier by the DLC.

¶24

I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶25

In view of the consent of the parties, the respondents are directed to place the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment before the the concerned DLC, who shall there-after

¶26

Page No.# 3/3

¶27

consider the petitioner's case as per the guidelines laid down by this Court in Aychut Ranjan Das Vs. State of Assam and others reported in 2006 (4) GLT 674 and in the case of Foziron Nessa and others vs. State of Assam and others reported in 2010 (4) GLT 340.

¶28

The above directions are subject to the condition that the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment has not been rejected earlier by the concerned DLC. In the event that the petitioner's application has been rejected by the concerned DLC earlier, a copy of the same should be furnished to the petitioner.

¶29

Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Sukhamay

¶32

Comparing Assistant

Nalini Chetia v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nalini Chetia v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhaba Kanta Dihingia Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Kushal Boro Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Pramila Roy Vs the Bodoland Territorial Council and 5 Ors.

Aminul Hoque Barbhuiya Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Raihana Akhtar and 28 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Ajit Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.