Petitioner sought compassionate appointment for his father who died in harness but had less than three years of government service. The petition was withdrawn, and the writ petition was dismissed.
Prayer for withdrawal of the writ petition allowed. Petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010195982022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/7040/2022
JYOTI TAID
S/O- LT. MUHIRAM TAID, P/R VILL- BORKHAMUKH MAJ GAON, P.O. BORKHAMUKH, DIST.- LAKHIMPUR VIA DHAKUAKHANA, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPTT., DISPUR, GHY-6
2:THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION (SECONDARY) KAHILIPARA GHY-19
3:INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS NDC LAKHIMPUR DISTRICT CIRCLE NORTH LAKHIMPUR
4:DY. COMMISSIONER CUM CHAIRMAN
DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE LAKHIMPUR ASSAM
5:THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF ASSAM GHY-
Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. K DEVI
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3
BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK
ORDER
14.11.2022
Heard Ms. K Devi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. U Sarma, learned Standing counsel, Secondary Education Department, Assam for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3. Also heard Mr. G Pegu, learned Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent Nos. 4 & 5.
The father of the petitioner, namely, Muhiram Taid served as a Grade-IV employee in Borkha Baghmara High School in the district of Lakhimpur, who died in harness on 25.01.2017 and the petitioner on 09.08.2017 applied before the authorities concerned for his compassionate appointment under the Die-in-Harness scheme of the State as applicable.
As the District Level Committee for compassionate appointment, Lakhimpur district did not consider his case till date, being aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.
State Government in the Department of Personnel: Personnel (B) issued the relevant notification vide O.M. No. ABP 50/2006/Pt/182 dated 01.06.2015 pertaining to compassionate appointment with regard to Government employees of the State.
The petitioner also submitted that the State Government in the Finance (Estt-A) Department vide notification No. FEG.28/2017/26 dated 14.09.2017 made a scheme for Compassionate Family Pension (CFP) in lieu of Compassionate Appointment with regard to those Government employees of the State who died/die in harness on or after 01.04.2017.
As such, the petitioner prays for consideration of his case by the concerned District Level Committee for compassionate appointment under the Die-in-Harness scheme of the State.
The Notification dated 01.06.2015 of the State Government in the Department
Page No.# 3/3
of Personnel: Personnel (B) with regard to compassionate appointment on the death of Government employees specifically provides that to get the benefit of a compassionate appointment, the Government incumbent who expires should have at least a minimum of 3 (three) years of Government service at the time of his/her death.
In the case in hand, in his application the petitioner stated that the date of birth of his father as recorded was 1st March of 1958 and that he expired on 25.01.2017.
As such, on 25.01.2017 at the time of death of petitioner’s father, the concerned Government employee was 58 Years 10 Months and 24 Days and had 1 Year 1 Month 6 Days of Government service which is much less than 3 years after his death on 25.01.2017.
Therefore, in terms of the said Government notification dated 01.06.2015 of the Personnel (B) Department of the State for compassionate appointment, the petitioner is not entitled for such appointment under the Die-in-Harness scheme of the State.
At this stage, on instruction of the petitioner, his counsel Ms. K Devi, prays for withdrawal of this writ petition to which the learned counsels for the respondents did not object.
As such, the prayer of the petitioner is allowed.
Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed on withdrawal.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to compassionate appointment given that the father had less than three years of government service at the time of death.
Whether to allow the withdrawal of the writ petition.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Jyoti Taid
The State of Assam
Manash Ranjan Pathak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
