Disposed

Tahera Begum Laskar v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC3 Nov 2022WP(C)/884/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of this writ petition by following the ratio from Trailokya Nath. It directed the District Level Committee to reconsider the petitioner's case for compassionate appointment against any available post commensurate with her educational qualification, citing Clause-15 of an Office Memorandum if no such vacancy exists.

What did the court decide?

Direction to place the petitioner's case for compassionate appointment in the next sitting of the District Level Committee against any vacancy commensurate with her qualification, referring to Clause-

Tahera Begum Laskar Vs the State of Assam… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010020762022

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/884/2022

¶5

TAHERA BEGUM LASKAR

¶6

D/O LATE ABDULLAH LASKAR, VILL- VICHINGCHA PART-I, DISTHAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN-788151

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006

¶9

2:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN-781009 3:THE DISTIRCT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER HAILAKANDI ASSAM

¶10

4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HAILAKANDI CUM THE CHAIRMAN DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND HAILAKANDI ASSAM 5:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR OF SCHOOL HAILAKANDI ASSA

¶11

Page No.# 2/4

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M J QUADIR

¶13

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU

¶14

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR

¶15

ORDER

¶16

03-11-2022

¶17

Heard Mr. M.J. Quadir, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Kaushik, learned standing counsel, Elementary Education Department appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 and Mr. G. Bokolial, learned Government Advocate for respondent No. 4.

¶18

The father of the petitioner while serving as Assistant Teacher in Bowarghat L.P. School, died-in-harness on 14-12-2011. Thereafter, the petitioner made an application, on 05-03-2012, for being appointed on compassionate ground for the post of Assistant Teacher in L.P. School. The case of the petitioner was not considered by the District Level Committee and, therefore, she filed a WP(C) No. 3157/2012 before this Court. The said writ petition was disposed of by order dated 28-06-2012 directing the authorities to place the application of the petitioner before the District Level Committee and to consider the same in terms of the criteria laid down in Achyut Ranjan Das & Ors. vs. State of Assam and Ors , reported in 2006(4) GLT 674 and in the case of Ms. Faziroon Nessa vs. State of Assam , reported in 2010 (4) GLT 340 . Thereafter, the District Level Committee, Hailakandi, in its meeting held on 30-11-2012, rejected the case of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had no requisite qualification to be appointed to the post of Assistant Teacher. The

¶19

Page No.# 3/4

¶20

petitioner approached the concerned respondent for consideration of her case and accordingly, her case was placed before the District Level Committee, Hailakandi, which held its meeting on 05-10-2021 and again rejected the case of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner did not have the requisite qualification as Assistant Teacher in L.P. category. The District Level Committee also rejected the application for being lost its force.

¶21

Similar matter has been considered by this Court in the case of Trailokya Nath vs State of Assam and others , reported in 2016 (5) GLT 310 , wherein the case of the petitioner, in that case, was also rejected for compassionate appointment due to want of required minimum percentage of marks. Accordingly, this Court held that the State respondents were not justified in rejecting the claim for compassionate appointment and, therefore, the petitioner should be considered against any other vacancy earmarked for compassionate appointment.

¶22

Following the ratio laid down in the case of Trailokya Nath (supra), this writ petition is also disposed of directing the respondent No. 4 to place the case of the petitioner in the next immediate sitting of the District Level Committee, Hailakandi for considering the case of the petitioner against any other post meant for compassionate appointment commensurate to the educational qualification of the petitioner.

¶23

While considering the case of the petitioner, if the District Level Committee finds that there is no vacancy to accommodate the petitioner to a post meant for compassionate appointment commensurate to her qualification, the District Level Committee may resort to Clause-15 of the Office Memorandum dated 0106-2015, issued by the Department of Personnel : Personnel (B), Government of Assam.

¶24

Page No.# 4/4

¶25

With the above observations and directions this writ petition stands

¶26

disposed of.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Tahera Begum Laskar v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tahera Begum Laskar 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mularam Narzary Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Shamsun Nahar Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Indeswar Deka Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Mridula Talukdar Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Dipak Borah Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Ganesh Chandra Roy and Anr. Vs Pranita Das and 6 Ors.