Dismissed

Azib Uddin Mazumder v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC11 Apr 2023WP(C)/797/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged rejection of his compassionate appointment application due to statutory delay. High Court held, applying Supreme Court precedent, that appointment after 26 years violates the scheme's objective of immediate relief and dismissed the writ.

What did the court decide?

No direction issued to the authorities to appoint the petitioner; writ petition dismissed.

Azib Uddin Mazumder Vs the State of Assam… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010025392023

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/797/2023

¶5

AZIB UDDIN MAZUMDER S/O- LATE BASIR UDDIN MAZUMDAR, VILLAGE AND P.O- UTTAR KRISHNAPUR,PART-II, P.S- SILCHAR, DIST- CACHAR, PIN-788006, ASSAM

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, CUM CHAIRMAN , SLC, ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006

¶8

2:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE (DLC) REP. BY THE CHAIRMAN CUM DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CACHAR DISTRICT AT SILCHAR ASSAM PIN- 788001

¶9

3:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

¶10

ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-07 ASSAM

¶11

4:THE DIG OF POLICE

¶12

ASSAM AT TARAPUR SILCHAR ASSAM PIN-788001

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CACHAR SILCHAR ASSAM PIN-78800

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M U MAHMUD

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM

¶17

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

¶18

ORDER

¶19

11.04.2023

¶20

Heard Mr. S. Afridi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. J. K.

¶21

Goswami, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the official respondents.

¶22

This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to issue a direction for considering the application submitted by the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground. It appears that the petitioner’s father, Late Basis Uddin Mazumdar was serving as an Armed Branch Constable under the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Silchar, Cachar, Assam. He died in harness on 10.07.1996. After the

¶23

death of his father, the petitioner claims to have submitted an application

¶24

seeking appointment on compassionate ground in the year 1997 but the said application is not available on record. According to the petitioner, he had filed another application on 04.05.2005 but no action was taken on the said

¶25

application. The prayer of the petitioner seeking appointment on

¶26

compassionate ground was finally rejected by the District Level Committee

¶27

(DLC) in its meeting held on 31.07.2015. Aggrieved thereby, this writ petition has

¶28

Page No.# 3/4

¶29

been filed.

¶30

After careful scrutiny of the materials available on record, it transpires that the petitioner was a minor in the year 1997 when his father died. Therefore, he could not have been appointed in any Government job at that time. In so far as the application submitted in 2005 is concerned, the same was also submitted almost nine years since the death of his father. It is no doubt correct that the DLC considered his application and rejected the same on 31.07.2015 on the ground of delay but what is to be noted herein that there was substantial delay on the part of the petitioner himself in submitting his application seeking appointment on compassionate ground. There was a Govt. circular in force at the relevant point of time requiring all applications for compassionate

¶31

appointment to be filed within one year from the date of death of the Govt. employee. In view of such Govt. Circular, the application of the writ petitioner was rejected on the ground of delay.

¶32

In the case of Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. & Others vs. Anusree

¶33

K.B. (Civil Appeal No.6958/2022) the Supreme Court, while considering the

¶34

validity of an order of rejection of application for appointment on compassionate ground, has held as follows :-

¶35

“ 9.1 Applying the law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid decisions

¶36

to the facts of the case on hand and considering the observations made hereinabove and the object and purpose for which the appointment on compassionate ground is provided, the respondent shall not be entitled to the appointment on compassionate ground on the death of her

¶37

father, who died in the year 1995. After a period of 24 years from the death of the deceased employee, the respondent shall not be entitled

¶38

Page No.# 4/4

¶39

to the appointment on compassionate ground. If such an appointment is made now and/or after a period of 14/24 years, the same shall be against the object and purpose for which the appointment on compassionate ground is provided.”

¶40

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, I am of the opinion that the ratio laid down in the case of Fertilizers and Chemicals

¶41

Travancore Ltd. & Others (supra) would be squarely applicable to the facts of

¶42

the present case as well. It is to be noted herein that the basic objective of the scheme of compassionate appointment framed by the Government is to provide immediate relief to the family of the deceased employee which has lost the sole bread earner. Therefore, no direction can be issued to the

¶43

authorities to appoint the writ petitioner on compassionate ground after 26 years of the death of his father as such a direction would be opposed to the basic objective of the scheme. As such, this case is held to be devoid of any merit and is accordingly dismissed.

¶44

JUDGE

¶45

Comparing Assistant

Azib Uddin Mazumder v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Azib Uddin Mazumder 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

Lohit Das Vs Megha Nidhi Dahal

Kumud Thakuria @ Kumud Kumar Das Vs Pabindra Kumar Nath

Md. Abu Taleb Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Nipu Kalita and 3 Ors. Vs Raj Chakraborty and 5 Ors.

Kismat Ali Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Ujjal Goswami and 91 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.