Partly allowed

Tuleswar Chungkrang v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC15 Dec 2021WP(C)/6797/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court directed the State Level Committee to reconsider the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment to a Grade-IV post, setting aside the rejection based on lack of Grade-III qualification, subject to the petitioner not preferring Grade-III. Writ petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Directs State Level Committee to reconsider petitioner's case for compassionate appointment to Grade-IV post and sets aside meeting minutes dated 15.09.2021 to that extent.

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

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010214622021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/6797/2021

¶5

TULESWAR CHUNGKRANG

¶6

S/O LT. DHIREN CHUNGKRANG, VILL. BORMUKALI GAON P.O. DHUNAGURI, DIST. DHEMAJI (ASSAM)

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, IRRIGATION DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006

¶9

2:THE CHIEF SECRETARY

¶10

TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM CUM CHAIRMAN STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6

¶11

3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM IRRIGATION DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006

¶12

4:THE CHIEF ENGINEER IRRIGATION ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-781003

¶13

5:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE DHEMAJI REP. BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DHEMAJI P.O. DHEMAJI DIST. DHEMAJI PIN-78705

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR F A LASKAR

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, IRRIGATION

¶17

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶18

ORDER

¶19

15.12.2021

¶20

Heard Mr. F.A Laskar learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner’s father died in harness on 15.07.2016, while working as a helper in the Office of the Executive Engineer, Lakhimpur Mechanical Division (Irrigation), ‘N’ Lakhimpur.

¶21

The petitioner filed an application for compassionate appointment on 31.10.2016, which was recommended by the District Level Committee (DLC), Dhemaji in its meeting minutes dated 29.04.2017. The DLC recommendation for appointment of the petitioner to a Grade-III post was thereafter considered by the State Level Committee (SLC). The SLC rejected the petitioner’s application vide its meeting minutes dated 15.09.2021, on the ground that the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualification for the post of Section Assistant.

¶22

The petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner being a high school pass candidate, the petitioner had not given any preference for any post for being appointed on compassionate basis. He submits that the petitioner should have been considered for any available post for compassionate appointment, including a Grade-IV post. He accordingly submits that the rejection of the petitioner’s application by the SLC should be set aside and a direction should be issued to the SLC, to re-consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment to a Grade-IV post.

¶23

Ms. M.D Bora, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 & 5 and Mr. N.

¶24

Page No.# 3/3

¶25

Upadhyay for respondent Nos. 1, 3 & 4 submit they have no objection to the prayer made by the petitioner’s counsel, provided that the petitioner has not made any preference for being appointed only to a Grade-III post in his application for compassionate appointment.

¶26

I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶27

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, the SLC is directed to re-consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment to a Grade-IV post, subject to the condition that the petitioner has not applied for compassionate appointment only to a Grade-III post. The re-consideration should be done in the next meeting of the SLC. Consequently, the meeting minutes dated 15.09.2021 is set aside only to the extent that it relates to the petitioner and only if the petitioner had not applied for a Grade-III post in his application for compassionate appointment.

¶28

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

Tuleswar Chungkrang v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tuleswar Chungkrang 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Provat Singha @ Prabhat Kumar Singha Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Jibon Chandra Sonowal Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Prabha Bala Rabha Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Hemanta Kumar Baruah and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 12 Ors.

Md. Sajjadul Hoque Choudhury Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Rajib Roy Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.