Widow of a police constable who died in harness sought compassionate appointment; her case was considered by the District Level Committee but not recommended for want of vacancy. The court declined to reopen the matter after the long passage of time and dismissed the writ petition.
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
GAHC010146102024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4462/2024
JUNMONI BEGUM
W/O- LATE MAJIBUR RAHMAN SIKDAR, VILL- NIZ GANDHMOW AND P.O.GANDHMOW, DIST.- KAMRUP (R), (ASSAM)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI781006
2:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-07 3:THE COMMANDANT 22ND A.P (IR) BATTALION LIKABALI DHEMAJI P.O. LIKHABALI DIST.- DHEMAJI ASSAM
4:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE DHEMAJI REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DHEMAJI P.O. DHEMAJI DIST- DHEMAJI ASSA
Page No.# 2/3
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR F A LASKAR, MR. D H MOZUMDER Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO
ORDER
06.09.2024
Heard Mr. F.A Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment on account of the death of her husband while in service with the Assam Police as a Constable. The case of the petitioner was initially taken up before the District Level Committee (DLC) held on 29.04.2014 but the DLC failed to consider the case of the petitioner due to nonavailability of vacancy in the Grade-III post. The learned counsel submits that even such vacancy is not available, the respondent authorities ought to have consider the case of the petitioner against any other vacancy in another Department in terms of Clause 15 of the Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015. The same having not been done, he submits that appropriate direction be passed to the respondent authorities.
Mr. R. Dhar, learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate at this stage submits that the petitioner is not correct in saying that her case was not considered by the DLC. Referring to the Meeting Minutes dated 29.04.2017, the learned counsel submits
Page No.# 3/3
that the DLC could not recommend the case of the petitioner for want of available vacancy in a Grade-IV post. Therefore it is clear that the case of the petitioner was considered on 29.04.2017. The petitioner now in the year 2024 cannot come with a plea that her case should have been considered in terms of Clause 15 of the Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015 in view of the fact that the urgency or the sense of immediacy has already diluted and lost in view of the fact that the employee concerned died in harness in the year 2010. The learned counsel therefore submits that in view of the long passage of time, the issue of compassionate appointment in respect of the petitioner should not be reopened. In support of his submission, the learned counsel relied upon the case of State of West Bengal –Vs- Debarata Tiwari & Ors. reported in AIR 2023 SC 1467. The learned counsel submits that the said decision of the Apex Court has been relied upon by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C) No. 4254/2024 (Sanjib Kumar Deuri -Vs- State of Assam & 4 Ors.) which was disposed vide Judgment & Order dated 28.08.2024.
Upon perusing the materials available on record and hearing the parties and also the authorities relied upon, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition at this stage. Accordingly, the same stands dismissed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's case for compassionate appointment should be reconsidered under Clause 15 of the OM dated 01.06.2015 despite long passage of time since her husband's death in service.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of West Bengal -Vs- Debarata Tiwari & Ors.Relied on
AIR 2023 SC 1467 · Who else cites this
Sanjib Kumar Deuri -Vs- State of Assam & 4 Ors.Referred
WP(C) No. 4254/2024
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Junmoni Begum
The State of Assam
The Inspector General of Police, Assam
The Commandant 22nd A.P (IR) Battalion, Likabali
The District Level Committee Dhemaji
Nelson Sailo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
