Dismissed

Bhaskar Das v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC8 Nov 2023WP(C)/2181/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition regarding a compassionate appointment claim. It directed the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup, as Chairman of the District Level Committee, to consider the petitioner's application and pass orders within 60 days.

What did the court decide?

The application of the petitioner be considered by the District Level Committee and orders passed within 60 days.

Bhaskar Das Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010059612023

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/2181/2023

¶5

BHASKAR DAS

¶6

S/O LATE BOLORAM DAS, VILL AND P.O.-JAMTOLA, P.S.-RANGIA, DISTKAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN-781365

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS

¶9

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6

¶10

2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONNEL (A) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GHY-06

¶11

3:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER RANGIA DIVISION (IRRIGATION) RANGIA DIST-KAMRUP

¶12

4:TEH DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP CHAIRMAN DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE KAMRU

¶13

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B K DAS

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, IRRIGATION

¶15

Page No.# 2/4

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Date : 08/11/2023

¶19

Heard Mr. S. Sarmah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. J. K. Goswami, learned additional Government Advocate for respondent 2 and 4 and Ms. D. S. Neog, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 3.

¶20

2. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner praying for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider his claim which is stated to have been submitted for appointment under the compassionate scheme. The petitioner’s father was serving as a Grade-IV employee under the establishment of the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, Rangia. The petitioner’s father was expired on 27.11.2011. Thereafter the petitioner being his son, he submitted his application for appointment on compassionate scheme as his father expired on 27.11.2011 while on service. Because of the death of the father, who was the sole earning member, the petitioner’s family suffered great financial distress and other misfortunes. Petitioner by that time has completed his Higher Secondary from Madhaya Panduri Higher Secondary in the year 2005. Although the application was submitted by the petitioner, but the same was considered and rejected by the minutes of the District Level Committee (DLC) vide order dated 30.01.2014. It is submitted that the District Level Committee (DLC) while rejecting his claim did not consider the vacancies available in the respective departments and his claim for compassionate appointment was rejected without the department considering the vacancies available.

¶21

3. Under such circumstances, he approached that authority and file several applications. His application dated 11.08.2019 has remained pending which is

¶22

Page No.# 3/4

¶23

not been disposed of. It is submitted that the said application made to the Executive Engineer, Rangia Division (Irrigation) Department, which was forwarded to the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (R). Thereafter another representation dated 02.08.2021 was filed before the Executive Engineer, Rangia Division, (Irrigation) Department but no response has been received from the respective department.

¶24

4. This Court earlier permitted the respondents to obtain their instructions in the matter. Today when the matter is called up, Mr. J. K. Goswami, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the instructions are still awaited and he seeks further time to complete his instructions.

¶25

5. Considering the prayers made in the writ petition that his grievance is directed against the non consideration of his applications filed before the authorities, and in view of the fact that no instructions are forthcoming from the respective department, this Court does not consider it necessary to keep the writ petition pending. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of in terms of the following directions.

¶26

6. The respondent authorities more particularly, the Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup, (R), who is the Chairman of the District Level Committee will consider the application stated to have been filed by the petitioner and forwarded by the Executive Engineer, Rangia Division (Irrigation) and pass necessary orders on the same. If any orders, in the meantime, have already been passed, then a copy of the same be furnished to the petitioner.

¶27

7. The entire exercise be completed within a period of 60 (sixty) days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

¶28

8. Writ petition is accordingly stands disposed of in terms of the above. No

Page No.# 4/4

order as to cost.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant

Bhaskar Das v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhaskar Das 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rubul Pathak Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Bipul Chandra Das and 1139 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 16 Ors.

Gulshan Nand Kapoor Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Souvik Sengupta Vs Coal India Limited and 4 Ors.

No. 5002266 Rifleman/ Gd Pradeep Kumar and 139 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 4 Ors.

Srimati Mina Bala Sarkar @ Mina Barman and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.(B)