Allowed

Minnatulla Mazumdar v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC5 Jan 2022WP(C)/6250/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed a writ petition challenging the rejection of a compassionate appointment application. The court held that no law mandates a minimum of 50% marks and remanded the matter to fresh consideration against any suitable vacant post.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 11.10.2021 setting aside compassionate appointment on the ground of insufficient marks is quashed and remanded for fresh consideration.

Minnatulla Mazumdar Vs the State of Assam… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010197272021

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/6250/2021

¶5

MINNATULLA MAZUMDAR

¶6

S/O LT. ABDUL RAKIB MAZUMDAR, R/O VILL. RAJYESWARPUR-VII, P.O. KATAGAON, P.S. LALA, DIST. HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN-788168

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS. THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, ELEMENTARY EDUCATION DEPTT. DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6

¶9

2:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-781019

¶10

3:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER HAILAKANDI P.O. P.S. AND DIST. HAILAKANDI ASSAM

¶11

4:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS HAILAKANDI

¶12

P.O. P.S AND DIST. HAILAKANDI ASSAM

¶13

5:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE HAILAKANDI FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HAILAKANDI P.O. P.S. AND DIST. HAILAKANDI

¶14

Page No.# 2/4

¶15

ASSA

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S SEAL

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶18

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

¶19

ORDER

¶20

05.01.2022

¶21

Heard Ms. S Kanungoe, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B Kaushik, learned counsel for the respondents No.1, 2, 3 and 4 being the authorities under the Elementary Education Department Government of Assam and Mr. P Saikia, learned counsel for the respondent No.5 being represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Hailakandi.

¶22

The father of the petitioner Abdul Rakib Mazumdar who was working as a Hindi teacher in Hussain Ahmed ME Madrassa in the Hailakandi district died in harness on 01.05.2009. On his death, the petitioner submitted an application for compassionate appointment. In consideration of such application, the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Chairman, District Level Committee, Hailakandi has passed the order impugned dated 11.10.2021. A reading of the order goes to show that the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was rejected inasmuch as, the petitioner had scored 33.8% marks in the Higher Secondary examination against the requisite qualification of 50% marks in the same examination at the time of submission of the application.

¶23

Page No.# 3/4

¶24

We have queried from the respondents as to under what provisions of law there is a requirement of 50% marks for compassionate appointment and no answer is forthcoming and we are also conscious of the aspect that there is no such law that exists.

¶25

From such point of view, the rejection of the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment on the ground that she has only 33.8% marks is liable to be interfered. We reiterate that as per the OM dated 01.06.2015, an application for compassionate appointment is to be considered against any suitable vacant post to which the applicant may be qualified for and it is not a necessity that the application has to be considered against the post in which the deceased had earlier served so as to bring in a requirement of any minimum marks in the qualifying examination.

¶26

Accordingly, the order dated 11.10.2021 of the Deputy Commissioner-cumChairman, District Level Committee, Hailakandi is set aside. The matter stands remanded back to the DLC of Hailakandi district for a fresh consideration of the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment against any suitable vacant post that the petitioner may be qualified for as per law.

¶27

Accordingly, the application of the petitioner be placed before the next available DLC of Hailakandi district.

¶28

Writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶29

Page No.# 4/4

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

Comparing Assistant

Minnatulla Mazumdar v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Minnatulla Mazumdar 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

Momrej Ali Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Mayur Kashyap Dutta Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Md. Samir Ali Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Jaysankar Ghoore Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Jiten Gogoi Vs Sanjay Kumar Krishna and 2 Ors.

Faruque Ahmed Laskar @ Faruk Ahmed Laskar Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.