Partly allowed

Pranab Kalita v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC3 Mar 2021WP(C)/333/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by an applicant for compassionate appointment rejected due to lack of qualification for Grade-III. Petitioner sought appointment in Grade-IV where vacancies existed.

What did the court decide?

Single Lever Committee and District Level Committee meeting minutes set aside; petitioner's application sent back to Deputy Commissioner (DLC) for reconsideration against a vacant Grade-IV post.

Pranab Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Public Procurement and Tenders | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010007762021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/333/2021

¶5

PRANAB KALITA S/O LATE NANIN CHANDRA KALITA R/O VILLAGE AND PO DHARAPUR, PS AZARA, DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY CUM CHAIRMAN, SLC GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 6

¶8

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.OF ASSAM PWD (ROADS) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 6

¶9

3:THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER PWD ROAD CIRCLE GUWAHATI 1

¶10

4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM CHAIRMAN OF THE DLC KAMRUP M ASSA

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. JYOTIRMOY ROY Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 03.03.2021

¶15

Heard Mr. J. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. D. Nath, learned counsel for all the respondents.

¶16

Page No.# 2/2

¶17

The petitioner’s case is that his application for compassionate appointment has been recommended by the DLC, Kamrup (M) on 18.07.2016. However, when the said recommendation was taken up by the SLC in its meeting held on 31.12.2018, the petitioner’s application was rejected on the ground that the petitioner’s case was not within the 5% quota available for compassionate appointment and that he was not qualified to be appointed against a Grade-III post.

¶18

On perusal of the meeting minutes of the DLC dated 18.07.2016, it is seen that there were four vacant posts in Grade-III and two vacant posts in Grade-IV in the office of the Superintending Engineer, PWD, Guwahati Road Circle, Guwahati and that the petitioner had been recommended for a Grade-III post.

¶19

It is also seen from the writ petition that the petitioner did not have the qualification for being considered for a Grade-III post at the time of submitting his application for compassionate appointment.

¶20

In view of the above, the State respondents should have considered the petitioner for appointment to a Grade-IV post. As the SLC and DLC have not considered the case of the petitioner for appointment against a Grade-IV post, the case of the petitioner is sent back to the DLC, Kamrup (M) for re-consideration of the petitioner’s case against a vacant Grade-IV post. Consequently, the meeting minutes of the SLC held on 31.12.2018 and the DLC meeting minutes dated 18.07.2016 are hereby set aside. The respondent No. 2 shall send the petitioner’s application to the respondent No. 4 for re-consideration of the petitioner’s case in the next DLC meeting.

¶21

The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶22

Comparing Assistant

Pranab Kalita v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pranab Kalita 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Binod Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Manjeet Das Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Milton Sarma Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Rajesh Paul Vs Hemen Das, IAS

Md. Jamal Uddin Sikdar Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gita Talukdar and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.