Allowed

Sadique Ahmed Barbhuiya v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC5 Mar 2019WP(C)/5881/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This dispute involves a writ petition seeking directions for compassionate appointment. The High Court observed that prolonged pendency prevented useful purpose and directed the State Level Committee to consider the petitioner's case in the next meeting along with other similarly situated claimants.

What did the court decide?

It was ordered that respondent No. 1 shall place the petitioner's case in the next meeting of the State Level Committee for consideration along with other similar claims.

Sadique Ahmed Barbhuiya Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010187382018

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 5881/2018

¶5

SADIQUE AHMED BARBHUIYA

¶6

S/O- LT MASHUK AHMED BARBHUIYA, R/O- VILL- BHABANIPUR, P.O. AMALA, P.S. LALA, DIST- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS.

¶9

REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, EDUCATION (ELEMENTARY) DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6

¶10

2:THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT REP. BY THE CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR

¶11

GHY-6

¶12

3:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTRAY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY-19

¶13

4:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE

¶14

FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT REP. BY THE DY. COMMISSIONER HAILAKANDI ASSAM.

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M DUTTA

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU (MR. N SARMA, R- 1,2,3)

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

BEFORE

¶19

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

¶20

ORDER

¶21

05.03.2019

¶22

Heard Ms. N. Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. N. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department, Govt. of Assam and Ms. R. B. Bora, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam.

¶23

By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to consider her case for appointment on compassionate ground.

¶24

Case of the petitioner is that his father Mashuk Ahmed Barbhuiya was the Head Teacher of No. 262 Purbokittarbond L. P. School in the district of Hailakandi. He died-in-harness on 07.01.2016.

¶25

Petitioner submitted application before the departmental authorities on 30.05.2016 seeking appointment on compassionate ground as it was contended that Mashuk Ahmed Barbhuiya was the sole bread earner of the family and on his death the family had no other source of income. Petitioner mentioned that he had passed Higher Secondary examination and therefore was eligible for appointment against a commensurate post.

¶26

Case of the petitioner was placed before the District Level Committee, Hailakandi on 03.04.2017. By resolution No. 3, District Level Committee recommended the case of the petitioner at Sl. No. 13 for appointment as Assistant Teacher in Lower Primary School against 152 numbers of vacancies.

¶27

The above recommendation of District Level Committee was thereafter placed before the State Level Committee in its meeting held on 20.07.2017. State Level Committee deferred consideration of the case of the petitioner alongwith other candidates for want of clarification regarding vacancy position as per new norms issued by Personnel (B) Department w.e.f. 01.06.2015. It was mentioned that the deferred cases be placed in the next meeting of the State Level Committee.

¶28

Page No.# 3/3

¶29

Grievance of the petitioner is that though more than 1 year had gone by case of the petitioner was not placed again before the State Level Committee in terms of earlier decision.

¶30

Hence, the writ petition.

¶31

This Court by order dated 10.09.2018 had issued notice with the observation that pendency of the petition shall not be a bar for the respondents to place the claim of the petitioner again before the State Level Committee.

¶32

Though this case is pending since 10.09.2018, no affidavit has been filed by the respondents. Notwithstanding non-filing of affidavit, considering the subject matter of the writ petition and the order that is proposed to be passed, Court is of the view that keeping the matter pending any further would not serve any useful purpose.

¶33

After due consideration, respondent No. 1 i.e. Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Elementary Education Department is directed to place the case of the petitioner in the next meeting of the State Level Committee whereafter State Level Committee shall consider the case of the petitioner alongwith the cases of other similarly situated claimants strictly in accordance with law, including qualification for the recommended post etc.

¶34

This disposes of the writ petition.

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

Comparing Assistant

Sadique Ahmed Barbhuiya v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadique Ahmed Barbhuiya 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunmoni Pegu Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

M/S. Pancharatna Cement Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and 5 Ors.

M/S. Jupiter Coke Industries Vs Union of India and 5 Ors.

Ccl International Limited and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Debasish Kumar Paul Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Sri Kamala Kanta Phukan @ Kamala Phukan and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.