Allowed

Bingwsri Ramchiary v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC10 Dec 2021WP(C)/6595/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed a writ petition regarding compassionate appointment. Despite a seven-year delay initiated by the respondent committee, the Court directed the State Level Committee to reconsider the petitioner's claim for vacant posts where he is qualified, citing settled law.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed; the State Level Committee is directed to reconsider the claim for compassionate appointment against available vacant posts qualified by the petitioner.

Bingwsri Ramchiary Vs the State of Assam and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010201892021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/6595/2021

¶5

BIRGWSRI RAMCHIARY

¶6

D/O LT. GANESH RAMCHIARY, R/O VILL. UTTAR KULABALI, P.S. BOGINODI DIST. LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

¶9

REP BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM EDUCATION ELEMENTARY DEPTT. DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006

¶10

2:THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE

¶11

CONSTITUTED FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND IN RESPECT OF EDUCATION (ELEMENTARY) DEPTT. REP .BY ITS CHAIRMAN

¶12

3:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE

¶13

CONSTITUTED FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND IN LAKHIMPUR DISTRICT REP .BY ITS CHAIRMAN

¶14

4:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER NORTH LAKHIMPUR ASSA

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M DAS

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶17

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Page No.# 2/4

¶20

Date : 10-12-2021

¶21

Heard Mr. M. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. G. Pegu, learned Government Advocate for the respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 and Mr. A. Phukan, learned Standing counsel for the respondent no.4.

¶22

By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the case projected by the petitioner is that his father died-in-harness on 04.04.2013 and the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment on 16.07.2013. The name of the petitioner was recommended for Grade-III post by the DLC for compassionate appointment held on 25.07.2014. The matter was then placed before the SLC for compassionate appointment on 25.06.2015 and the SLC required certain clarification from respondent no.4 for which the case of the petitioner was not considered. Thereafter, the SLC for compassionate appointment in its meeting held on 28.12.2020 considered and rejected the case of the petitioner due to non-availability of requisite qualification. Accordingly, the decision of the SLC held on 28.12.2020 has been assailed in this writ petition.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on two decision of the Court, viz., (i) Jiban Thakuria Vs. State of Assam and ors, 2015 (3) NEJ 601 and (ii) Md. Mehmod Akand Vs. State of Assam and 4 ors., (2018) 5 GLR 23.

¶24

It is submitted that the law settled by this Court to the effect that notwithstanding the nature of application for compassionate appointment made, the cases are required to be considered against any post, be it Grade-III and/ or

¶25

Page No.# 3/4

¶26

Grade-IV, and that the post applied for by the applicant is merely an indication of his desire and does not mean that the Committee shall consider such application only against such post indicated.

¶27

Opposing the prayer made in this writ petition, the learned Government Advocate submits that the father of the petitioner had died-inharness on 04.04.2013 and the very purpose for claiming appointment on compassionate ground has been granted as the petitioner had been able to sustain himself for more than 8 years. In this regard, the Court is of the considered opinion that in the present case in hand, it was the SLC who had delayed the decision of taking appropriate decision by taking up reconsideration of the case of the petitioner on 28.12.2020 after having seeking clarification on 25.06.2015.

¶28

Moreover, in view of the well settled provision of law that the authorities are required to consider the claim for compassionate appointment against any available vacant post to which the applicant will be duly qualified for, a mere delay in the disposal of the application of the petitioner would not disqualify the petitioner’s case for re-consideration by the SLC.

¶29

Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed with an issuance of notice on the respondents by directing the SLC to re-consider the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment. In light of the law well settled by this Court in the herein before referred decisions of this Court.

¶30

Page No.# 4/4

¶31

It is further directed that the result of the case of the SLC would be duly communicated to the petitioner through e-mail address which would be provided by the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a certified copy before the office of the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam-cum-Chairman, SLC for compassionate appointment along with her e-mail address. The Court also expects the SLC to collect the requisite date from various districts and establishments in terms of OM dated 01.06.2015 and/or any other OM in force at present and to take an appropriate decision.

¶32

It is submitted that some typographical mistake has crept in the writ petition as such the same be corrected in the presence of the learned Registrar (Judicial).

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

Comparing Assistant

Bingwsri Ramchiary v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bingwsri Ramchiary 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dipankar Dutta and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Jayanta Barman and 23 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

MD Abdur Razzaque Vs Padmeswar Borah and 5 Ors.

Mohan Chauhan Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Lukumoni Dhadumia Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Hafizur Rahman Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.