Disposed

Smti. Banashree Gogoi v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC2 Feb 2018WP(C)/5024/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This matter involved a writ petition by the daughter of an ex-officio employee of the Forest Department seeking compassionate appointment. The court directed the Deputy Commissioner to consider the application within three months. The petition was disposed of with an instruction to forward the result to the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents, specifically Respondent No. 6, to place the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment before the concerned DLC for consideration within 3 months.

Smti. Banashree Gogoi Vs the State of Assam… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010023442016

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 5024/2016

¶5

1:SMTI. BANASHREE GOGOI

¶6

D/O LT. BIREN GOGOI, R/O BOCHA GAON, MOUZA- KAZIRANGAR, P.S. BOKAKHAT, SUB-DIVISION- BOKAKHAT, DIST- GOLAGHAT, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS

¶9

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, FOREST DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6

¶10

2:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND HEAD OF FOREST FORCE ASSAM REHABARI

¶11

GHY-8

¶12

3:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER EASTERN ASSAM WILDLIFE DIVISION BOKAKHAT ASSAM

¶13

4:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER GOLAGHAT DIVISION GOLAGHAT ASSAM

¶14

5:THE DIRECTOR KAZIRANGA NATIONAL PARK BOKAKHAT CUM FIELD DIRECTOR KAZIRANGA TIGER RESERVE BOKAKHAT GOLAGHAT ASSA

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR T KALITA

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, FOREST

¶18

BEFORE

¶19

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Date : 02-02-2018

¶22

Heard Mr. I C Deka, counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P K Borah, Standing counsel, Forest Department.

¶23

The petitioner’s case in brief is that her father, Lt. Biren Gogoi, died-in-harness on 17.01.2014, while working as Grass Cutter in the Office of the Divisional Forest Officer, Eastern Assam Wildlife Division, Bokakhat, Assam. The petitioner immediately submitted an application for compassionate appointment and the Director, Kaziranga National Park, Bokakhat vide letter No. A-WLE/11/2014/807 dated 15.03.2014 addressed to the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Assam forwarded the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment.

¶24

The petitioner’s counsel submits that the State respondents have not considered the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment till date and thus, the petitioner prays for a direction for the same.

¶25

Mr. P K Borah, Standing counsel, Forest Department submits that the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment has been sent to the DLC for consideration. He, however, submits that he does not know whether the petitioner’s application has been considered by the DLC.

¶26

On hearing the counsels for the parties, this Court finds that the Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat is a necessary party. Accordingly, on the oral prayer made by the petitioner’s counsel, the Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat is impleaded as respondent No. 6 to the writ petition.

¶27

The petitioner shall make the necessary correction to the cause title of the writ petition during the course of the day.

¶28

Page No.# 3/3

¶29

On perusal of the documents on record and after hearing the submissions made by the counsels, the only issue to be decided is with regard to whether the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment has been considered or not. However, as the counsel for the respondents is unable to give an answer right way, this Court is of the view that the matter should not be kept pending any longer, as the writ petition can be disposed of on the basis of the submissions made by the counsels for the parties.

¶30

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents, especially the respondent No. 6, to place the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment before the concerned DLC, who shall consider the same in its next meeting, if not considered earlier.

¶31

In the event that the petitioner’s application has been considered earlier by the concerned DLC, the result of the same should be communicated by the respondents to the petitioner. The exercise to be conducted by the DLC for consideration of the petitioner’s application should be done within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order by the respondent No.6.

¶32

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Smti. Banashree Gogoi v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smti. Banashree Gogoi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Eunush Ali and 8 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Babu Moni Deka and Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Bulbul Ali and 36 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Rejuwan Ali and 13 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 139 Ors.

Chandan Sarma Vs the State of Assam and 20 Ors.

Musst. Sabina Yasmin and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.