Remanded

Rumena Taslim v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC7 Sept 2022WP(C)/4572/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought compassionate appointment after father's death. High Court found DLC rejected due to vacancies only, ignoring Rule 15 of OM allowing inter-departmental appointment. Matter remanded to DLC.

What did the court decide?

Quashed impugned communication dated 02.02.2018; remanded to DLC to reconsider case under Clause 15 of OM dated 01.06.2015.

Rumena Taslim Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Public Procurement and Tenders | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010141542021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4572/2021

¶4

RUMENA TASLIM

¶5

D/O- LT. ZAKIR HUSSAIN, R/O- GORIA BORI GAON, P.O. LUCHANA BORI, P.S. MOIRABARI, DIST.- NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782126

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-05

¶8

2:THE DIRECTOR ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GHY-19

¶9

3:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT NAGAON ASSAM REP. BY ITS CHAIRPERSON THE DY. COMMISSIONER NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782001

¶10

4:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS NDC NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 78200

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MD. M H CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU

¶12

Page No.# 2/3

¶13

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Date : 07.09.2022

¶16

Heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B.Koushik, learned standing counsel, Secondary Education appears on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4 and Mr. G. Bokolial, learned Govt. Advocate appears for respondent No.3.

¶17

The father of the petitioner while serving as Hindi Teacher of Batamari High School of Nagaon District died-in-harness on 16.12.2015. Thereafter, petitioner made an application on 10.02.2016 for appointment on compassionate grounds. As there was no response to the application, petitioner filed WP(C)/33/2018 before this Court. While the writ petition was pending , the respondents produced a communication dated 02.02.2018 written by the Inspector of Schools, Nagaon District Circle, Nagaon and addressed to the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaon, Assam, wherein, it is stated that in the DLC meeting held on 26.09.2016, the case of the petitioner was not recommended for appointment as Assistant Teacher under Secondary Education inasmuch as she did not possess the B.Ed degree and further as there was no sufficient vacancy to recommend the case of the petitioner for appointment in Grade-III and Grade-IV post. On the basis of the said letter dated 02.02.2018, this Court by order dated 26.02.2018, came to the conclusion that as the qualification for compassionate appointment of the petitioner was placed before the DLC and consideration was given, no further adjudication is required in the said writ petition. Accordingly, the said writ petition was disposed of, however by giving liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court again if so advised.

¶18

Page No.# 3/3

¶19

Thereafter, the present writ petition has been filed by the writ petitioner challenging the communication dated 02.02.2018, made by the Inspector of Schools, Nagaon District Circle, Nagaon. A perusal of the DLC minutes would indicate that the case of the petitioner was rejected only for want of vacancy. It does not indicate that the case of the petitioner was not recommended due to non-possession of B.Ed degree nor is there any indication that the case of the petitioner was also considered for any other Grade-III or Grade-IV posts.

¶20

Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015, issued by the Department of Personnel, Personnel (B), Government of Assam provides the Scheme for appointment on compassionate grounds and at Clause 15 of the said OM, it is provided that if sufficient vacancies are not available in a particular office to accommodate the case of applicants for compassionate appointment, it is open to the Administrative Department/Office to take up the matter with other Departments/Offices of the Government to provide an earlier appointment on compassionate grounds to those who are in the waiting list.

¶21

The DLC which held its meeting on 26.09.2016 appears not to have considered Clause 15 of the OM dated 01.06.2015 while considering the case of the petitioner.

¶22

Accordingly, the matter is remanded back to the DLC, Nagaon District to reconsider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds in terms of Clause 15 of the OM dated 01.06.2015 in its next immediate sitting.

¶23

With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶24

JUDGE

¶25

Comparing Assistant

Rumena Taslim v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rumena Taslim 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

Jiten Ronghang Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Anupam Borthakur Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Jiban Ch Barman and Anr. Vs Smti Bijoya Chaudhary, Acs and Anr.

Dr. Chandana Deka Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Bishnu Lal Chetri Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Md. Imdadul Islam and Anr. Vs Dr. Bijoya Choudhury and 3 Ors.