Allowed

Bhanita Baruah v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC3 Aug 2018WP(C)/5097/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed a writ petition seeking compassionate appointment for a widow whose husband died in service. The Court set aside an earlier rejection on grounds of no vacancy, noting a subsequent meeting had recommended appointments, and directed the State to reconsider the application.

What did the court decide?

Rejection of applicant's compassionate appointment application set aside; State directed to place application before DLC for consideration on merit.

Bhanita Baruah Vs the State of Assam and 3… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2018)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010134552018

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 5097/2018

¶5

1:BHANITA BARUAH

¶6

W/O. LATE MAHESH NATH, R/O. VILLAGE- MANGALDAI GAON, P.O. AND P.S. MANGALDAI, DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN 780125.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.

¶9

REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, REVENUE (LR) DEPTT., DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

¶10

2:THE DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SURVEYS ASSAM RUPNAGAR GUWAHATI-32.

¶11

3:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE (DLC) DARRANG REP. BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DARRANG ASSAM.

¶12

4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DARRANG P.O. AND P.S. MANGALDAI DIST. DARRANG ASSAM

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M AHMED

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶15

Page No.# 2/3

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶17

ORDER

¶18

03.08.2018

¶19

Heard Mr. M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner’s husband died in harness on 17.05.2016, while working as Mandal (Land Recorder) in the Officer of the Deputy Commissioner, Darrang. The petitioner applied for compassionate appointment on 10.06.2016. The DLC rejected the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment vide its meeting minutes dated 01.10.2016 on the ground that there was no vacancy against the quota reserved for posts under compassionate appointment. The DLC also stated that the petitioner’s application for appointment to the post of Junior Assistant had been rejected due to pendency of WP(C) No.7318/2013 in this Court.

¶20

The petitioner’s counsel submits that the reason for rejection of the petitioner’s application for the post of Junior Assistant, as given for the DLC meeting minutes dated 01.10.2016 does not hold water in view of the fact that in the subsequent DLC meeting dated 24.03.2017, one Sri Chiranjita Sarma, was recommended for appointment on compassionate ground to the post of Junior Assistant. The petitioner’s counsel, thus, prays that a direction should be issued to the State respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioner on merit as the rejection of the petitioner’s application was on wrong grounds.

¶21

Mr. N. Goswami, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.3 and 4 and Mr. J. Handique, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 submit that they have got no objection to the petitioner’s prayer in view of the DLC meeting minutes dated 24.03.2017.

¶22

I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶23

The rejection of the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment by the DLC on 01.10.2016 for the post of Junior Assistant, on the ground that there was no vacancy, has been belied by the DLC meeting minutes dated 24.03.2017, by which, Sri Chiranjita Sarma, has been recommended for the post of Junior Assistant. Even assuming that there was no vacancy at the time of the DLC meeting on 01.10.2016 and that the vacancy arose subsequent to the DLC meeting dated 01.10.2016, the petitioner’s application for compassionate

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

appointment being valid for 2 years, as per the guidelines laid down by this Court in Achyut Ranjan Das and Others Vs. State of Assam and Others, reported in 2006 (4) GLT 674 , and the fact that the petitioner’s application had not been considered on merit earlier, required the State respondents to consider the petitioner’s case on merit during the validity of the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment. Further the meeting minutes of the DLC Darrang, Mangaldai, dated 30.06.2017 and 10.10.2017 also shows that there was consideration of the candidates for compassionate appointment to the post of Junior Assistant (Grade-III post).

¶26

In view of the above reasons, the rejection of the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment vide the DLC meeting minutes dated 01.10.2016 being arbitrary, the same is accordingly set aside. The State respondents are directed to place the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment before the concerned DLC for its consideration in its next meeting. The DLC shall, thereafter, consider the petitioner’s application on merit.

¶27

Writ petition is, accordingly, allowed.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Bhanita Baruah v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhanita Baruah v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Musstt Shahnaz Begum @ Shehnaz Afsary Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Dr. Kanakeswar Bordoloi Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Girin Gogoi and and 7 Ors, Vs the Assam Power Distribution Co. Ltd. Apdcl and 7 Ors.

Ajay Kumar Gupta Vs Brahmaputra Valley Fertilizer Corporation Ltd. 6 Ors.

Uttam Doley Vs the State of Assam and 11 Ors.

Ram Sharan Shyoran Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.