Jahirul Islam Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010202392025

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : WA/335/2025

¶5

JAHIRUL ISLAM

¶6

SON OF LATE NAIMUL ISLAM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- SILPUKHURI, P.OSILPUKHURI, PS- MIKIRBHETA, DIST-MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782123.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

¶9

2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT (P AND RD) DISPUR GUWAHATI-06

¶10

3:THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE (SLC) FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT BEING REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN NAMELY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-06

¶11

4:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTE (DLC) FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT MORIGAON REP. BY THE DEPUTY/DISTRICT COMMISSIONER MORIGAON CUM CHAIRMAN DLC MORIGAON

¶12

Advocate for the Petitioner : KHURSHID ALAM SODIAL, MR. S K TALUKDAR,MR. J M A CHOUDHURY,MS. S T BOKTH,K A SODIAL

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

Advocate for the Respondent : ,

¶15

BEFORE

¶16

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA

ORDER

14.11.2025

(M. Zothankhuma, J)

Heard Mr. S.K. Talukdar, the learned counsel for the appellant, who submits that the impugned judgment & order dated 21.02.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 941/2025, rejecting the appellant’s prayer for compassionate appointment should be set aside, inasmuch as, another Single Bench in a batch of writ petitions, the lead case being WP(C) 342/2025, which was disposed of, vide order dated 03.04.2025, had directed that all cases of compassionate appointment pending in the Court as on 03.04.2025, should be considered without taking recourse to the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024. The Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 had done away with compassionate appointment and had instead replaced “compassionate appointment” by way of “Compassionate Family Pension”, w.e.f. 18.09.2024. Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 was made applicable in respect of deaths that had occurred or persons had retired prematurely on being permanently incapacitated from service on or after 01.04.2017 .

¶21

Ms. R. B. Bora, learned counsel appears for the respondent nos.1, 3 & 4.

¶22

The facts of the case is that the appellant’s father died-in-harness on

¶23

Page No.# 3/4

¶24

13.03.2002 and the application for compassionate appointment made by the appellant had been recommended by the District Level Committee (DLC) on 07.10.2017. The State Level Committee (SLC) had deferred the decision for consideration of the petitioner for compassionate appointment, due to nonsubmission of NOC and NOK in it’s meeting minutes dated 02.03.2023. Subsequent to the said decision of the SLC on 02.03.2002, no further action had been taken by the SLC.

¶25

The appellant’s further case is that one Jahangir Alam’s application for compassionate appointment was also deferred by the SLC on 02.03.2023, on the same grounds as the petitioner. However, Jahangir Alam was subsequently appointed on compassionate appointment. The appellant’s case is that due to the above, the appellant should also have been considered for compassionate appointment.

¶26

The learned Single Judge on considering the fact that the petitioner’s father died on 13.03.2002 and as the objective of compassionate appointment was to give immediate succour to the family who had lost it’s breadwinner, such objective would not survive after a gap of 23 years. By applying the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of The State of West Bengal vs. Debabrata Tiwari & Others , reported in ( 2023) SCC OnLine SC 219, wherein it was held that compassionate appointment was not a vested right and the aspect of delay would be of paramount consideration, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. The learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition, also considered paragraph-7.5 of Debabrata Tiwari (supra), wherein it had been laid down that in case of prolonged delay, either on the part

¶27

Page No.# 4/4

¶28

of the applicant or the authorities, the sense of immediacy was diluted and lost and as such, compassionate appointment after 23 years would not be in sync with the objective of the scheme for compassionate appointment.

¶29

The fact that the appellant’s father died in the year 2002 is not in dispute and as on date, more than 23 years have elapsed. As such, we do not find any reason to come to a different finding than that made by the learned Single Judge.

¶30

With regard to the stand of the appellant that, had the appellant’s writ petition i.e. WP(C) 941/2025 not been disposed of on 21.02.2025, i.e, prior to the disposal of the batch of writ petitions, the lead case being WP(C) 342/2025 on 03.04.2025, the petitioner would have had the benefit of the common order dated 03.04.2025. Though the submission made by the appellant’s counsel with regard to the above is not disputed by us, it is unfortunate that the case of the appellant herein cannot stand in the same footing as those petitioners whose cases were disposed of on a subsequent date i.e. 03.04.2025, as his case was not pending on 03.04.2025. As such, we are of the view that the common order dated 03.04.2025 passed in the batch of writ petitions, the lead case being WP(C) 342/2025, does not cover the appellant’s case.

¶31

The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

¶32

JUDGE JUDGE

¶33

Comparing Assistant

Jahirul Islam v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jahirul Islam v. the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

MD Akter Khan @ Bapon Khan Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Lalu Tanti @ Ajit Tanti Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Ajibar Rahman Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Molin Choudhury and 43 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Keshav Nath Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Bablul Hoque Mazumder and Anr. Vs the State Bank of India and 6 Ors.