Partly allowed

Amrita Goswami v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC6 Feb 2020WP(C)/8651/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cornor Ja. amended the SLC's order rejecting compassionate appointment due to lack of quota, despite DLC recommending the petitioner. The court quashed the rejection as bad in law and directed the SLC to reconsider the case.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order of SLC dated 31.12.2018 set aside and quashed; direction to SLC to reconsider the case in its next meeting.

Amrita Goswami Vs the State of Assam and 4… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2020)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010288052019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 8651/2019

¶5

1:AMRITA GOSWAMI

¶6

W/O- LT ARUP GOSWAMI, D/O- LT DEBENDRANATH GOSWAMI, R/O- T R P ROAD, CHOLADHORA, CHANDAPUR BYE LANE, NEAR BHUBANESWAR TOWER, DIST- JORHAT, P.O. AND P.S. JORHAT, PIN- 785001, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS.

¶9

REP. BY THE CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM CUM THE CHAIRMAN, STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE (SLC) FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND, DISPUR, GHY-06

¶10

2:THE DY. COMMISSIONER JORHAT ASSAM CUM CHAIRMAN DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE (DLC) FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT JORHAT PIN- 785001 ASSAM

¶11

3:THE COMM. AND SPECIAL SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PUBLIC WORK (ROADS) DEPTT. DISPUR GHY-06 ASSAM

¶12

4:THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DEPTT. DISPUR GHY-06 ASSAM

¶13

Page No.# 2/5

¶14

5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPTT. JORHAT STATE ROAD DIVISION GARAMUR JORHAT PIN- 785007 ASSA

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S DUTTA

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶17

BEFORE

¶18

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK

¶19

ORDER

¶20

06-02-2020

¶21

Heard Ms. D. Musahary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. Nath, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5.

¶22

Petitioner, Smti. Amrita Goswami’s husband Arup Goswami was a regular Grade-III (LDA) employee in the establishment of the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department (PWD), Jorhat State Road Division, Jorhat, who died in harness on 16.10.2015 leaving behind her and their minor daughter of 4½ years old. Her husband was the sole earning member of their family.

¶23

The petitioner, a Graduate in Arts on 07.11.2015 filed an application for her compassionate appointment under the Die-in-Harness Scheme of the State which was accordingly processed and considered by the District Level Committee for compassionate appointment (DLC), Jorhat in its meeting held on 17.11.2015 found that one Grade-III post is available in the establishment of the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department (PWD), Jorhat State Road Division, Jorhat for appointment under compassionate ground and no person has been appointed in the said post and further, only one person is to be appointed in Grade-III post for compassionate appointment. Accordingly, the DLC, Jorhat in its said meeting dated 17.11.2015 recommended the petitioner for her appointment on

¶24

Page No.# 3/5

¶25

compassionate ground for the year 2014-15 in Grade-III post.

¶26

After such recommendation of the DLC, Jorhat dated 17.11.2015, the State Level Committee (SLC) in its meeting held on 31.12.2018 rejected the case of the petitioner for her compassionate appointment holding that she is not within 5% quota.

¶27

Being aggrieved with such decision of the SLC dated 31.12.2018 in rejecting her case for compassionate appointment, though recommended by the DLC, Jorhat on 17.11.2015, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.

¶28

Pursuant to the order dated 27.11.2019, Mr. D. Nath, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam have placed an extract of Jorhat District pertaining to the PWD Department and submitted that cadre strength of the proposed post and total number of vacancy with year wise breakup and placed that the cadre strength of the proposed GradeIII, for LDA – 12, 7 LDAs are in service and 5 are vacant and similarly, for Section Assistant - 8, 7 Section Assistant are in service and 5 are vacant and that total number of incumbent already appointed on compassionate ground amongst 7 LDAs and 7 Section Assistants is 1 and therefore, submitted that no post is available for appointment under compassionate appointment in Grade-III post.

¶29

But, it is clear from the minutes of the DLC, Jorhat dated 17.11.2015 (Annexure-A to the writ petition) that pertains to the Executive Engineer, Jorhat State Road Division, Jorhat, a post was available for appointment under compassionate ground in Grade-III post, wherein it was also specified that no person was appointed against said Grade-III post and a person can be appointed in Grade-III and accordingly, the petitioner was recommended by the DLC, Jorhat in its minute dated 17.11.2015 for her compassionate appointment for the year 201415 in a Grade-III post under the Executive Engineer, Jorhat State Road Division, Jorhat.

¶30

This Court in the case of Achyut Ranjan Das and Others Vs. State of Assam and Others reported in 2006 (4) GLT 674 and as mentioned in the Office Memorandum of the Personal (B) Department of the State that the DLC shall meet once in every 2(two) months on the last Saturday of the second month and that the SLC shall meet once in every 3(three) months. Moreover, a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ajij Jaman Barbhuiya Vs. State of Assam and Others reported in 2018 (2) GLT 390 at paragraph 4 has observed as follows:--

¶31

Page No.# 4/5

¶32

“ 4. Application made by the appellant for appointment on compassionate ground well within time on 07.10.2009 was brought to an end only on 11.08.2017. The inordinate delay in the disposal of the application certainly cannot be attributed to the appellant. Further, non-application of mind is also demonstrated by the State Level Committee in rejecting his case due to want of vacancy when an exercise had already been conducted by the District Level Committee certifying the suitability of the appellant and existence of vacancies in the post of Forest Guards under the establishment of the Divisional Forest Officer, Social Forestry Division, Silchar. Page No.# 6/6 Rejection of an application without due application of mind and as a matter of course and by employing the expressions “want of vacancy” and “spent its force”, are easy methods to deprive a candidate from his legitimate entitlement. Such course of action would only go to frustrate and defeat the very object governing compassionate appointments. These shortcomings finds best illustration in the present case where the candidature of the appellant was rejected for want of vacancy despite favourable recommendation being made by the District Level Committee having regard to existence of vacancies and on ground of elapse of time, for which the appellant cannot be found fault at.”

¶33

It is the Executive Engineer, Jorhat State Road Division, Jorhat who itself clarified that there was a vacancy in Grade-III post during the period of 2014-15 for consideration for appointment on compassionate ground in the said establishment. Accordingly, on 17.11.2015 the DLC, Jorhat considered the case of the petitioner and recommended her name for such appointment. But, the SLC on 31.12.2018 after 3(three) years of such recommendation of the DLC, Jorhat, rejected the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment, just on the ground that she does not come under the 5% quota, which finding is not acceptable, since the vacancy position under the Executive Engineer, Jorhat State Road Division, Jorhat clearly mentioned about availability of a vacant post of Grade-III under it for the year 2014-15 for appointment under compassionate ground, while recommending the petitioner.

¶34

Considering the entire aspect of the matter and the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ajij Jaman Barbhuiya (Supra), this Court finds that the impugned decision of the SLC for compassionate appointment dated 31.12.2018 rejecting the case of the petitioner for her compassionate appointment holding that she does not come under the 5% quota, is bad in law, which cannot sustain and is accordingly, set aside and quashed.

¶35

Consequently, it is directed that the SLC in its next meeting shall reconsider the case of the petitioner for her appointment on compassionate ground as per the recommendation of the DLC, Jorhat dated 17.11.2015.

¶36

Petitioner shall submit a certified copy of this order before the Commissioner and Special Secretary, PWD, Guwahati, Assam on or before 20.02.2020 and shall obtain necessary acknowledgment in that regard from the said authority.

¶37

The SLC shall intimate its decision about the outcome of her compassionate

¶38

Page No.# 5/5

¶39

appointment to the petitioner.

¶40

With the above observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶41

JUDGE

¶42

Comparing Assistant

Amrita Goswami v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amrita Goswami 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nur Islam Mondal Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Krishna Moni Borah Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Anoop Singh Bhandari Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors.

Dilip Sarma Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Bashab Das and 27 Ors. Vs Anurag Goel

Lalit Ch. Bhakat and 3 Ors. Vs Nazrul Islam and 4 Ors.