Disposed

Diju Kumar Bhuyan v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC8 May 2019WP(C)/1844/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought appointment under the die-in-harness scheme following his father's death. The SLC rejected the claim due to no vacancy. The High Court directed the authority to re-consider the application by examining availability of vacancies in other departments as per relevant Office Memorandum.

What did the court decide?

Direct the respondent authority to re-consider the application by examining availability of vacancy in other Departments and inform the petitioner by issuing a speaking order within two months.

Diju Kumar Bhuyan Vs the State of Assam and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010054122019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 1844/2019

¶5

1:DIJU KUMAR BHUYAN

¶6

S/O- LATE SRI KOMOLA KANTA BHUYAN, VILL- DEKASUNDOR AND P.OJAMUGURIGHAT, DIST- SONITPUR, ASSAM, PIN- 784180

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS

¶9

REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, COOPERATION DEPTT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 06

¶10

2:THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM GUWAHATI 781006 ASSAM

¶11

3:THE REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES KHANAPARA GUWAHATI- 22 ASSAM

¶12

4:THE DISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES DIST- SONITPUR TEZPUR

¶13

5:STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE COOPERATION DEPTT REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI- 06

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

6:DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE COOPERATION DIST- SONITPUR REP. BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SONITPU

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A SARMA

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶18

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. KOTISWAR SINGH

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Date : 08-05-2019

¶21

Heard Mr. A. C. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. D. S. Neog, learned standing counsel, Corporation Department.

¶22

The petitioner claims to have applied for appointment under the die-in-harness scheme on account of the death of his father while serving as Junior Inspector-cum-Auditor in Corporation Department on 28.12.2012.

¶23

The petitioner submitted his application for appointment under the die-in-harness scheme on 20.06.2013.

¶24

The grievance of the petitioner is that though, the DLC had duly recommended the case of the petitioner for appointment under the scheme, the SLC rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground of want of vacancy.

¶25

In this regard the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to the proceeding of the SLC meeting held on 14.10.2014, in which, it has been mentioned that the Committee did not recommend the case of the petitioner for appointment under the scheme, as there was no vacancy available. However, nothing is indicated in the said proceeding as to whether the SLC considered the existence of vacancy in other departments in the light of para 15 of Office

¶26

Page No.# 3/3

¶27

Memorandum No. ABP 50/2006/Pt/182 dated 01.06.2015, the relevant portion of which reads as follows:

¶28

“If sufficient vacancies are not available in any particular office to accommodate the persons in the waiting list for compassionate appointment, it is open to the administrative Department/Office to take up the matter with other Department/Officers of the Government to provide at an early appointment on compassionate grounds to those in the waiting list.”

¶29

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondent authority to re-consider the application of the petitioner by examining the availability of vacancy in other Departments, and inform thereof to the petitioner by issuing a speaking order, which exercise shall be undertaken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Diju Kumar Bhuyan v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Diju Kumar Bhuyan v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arabinda Rabha and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Jatindra Kumar Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Arabinda Rabha and 13 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Smti Rekha Rani Chanda Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Kumud Choudhury Vs Ashok Kumar Bhattarai

Sailen Dutta Das Vs the Assam University and 4 Ors.