Son of a police constable who died in harness in 1992 sought compassionate appointment; the SLC rejected the proposal in 2015 on the ground of delay. The writ petition filed in 2025 was dismissed as suffering from delay and laches, the court holding the claim had become stale and immediacy absent.
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.# 1/10
GAHC010189012025
2025:GAU-AS:12193
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Writ Petition [C] no. 4944/2025
Arif Ali, aged about 35 years, son of Late Alimot Ali, resident of Village -Uday Nagar, P.O.- Golaghat, P.S.- Golaghat, District - Golaghat, Assam Pin-785614
…………………..Petitioner
-Vs-
..............Respondents
Page No.# 2/10
| Petitioner | : Mr. A. R. Bhuyan, Advocate |
|---|---|
| Respondents | : Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, |
| Advocate | |
| Date of Hearing and Judgment & Order | : 05.09.2025 |
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
JUDGMENT & ORDER
[A] set aside / quash the impugned minutes / Order dated 03/08/2017 [Annexure-8] issued by the Additional Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Home Department vide letter No. ΗΜΑ. 612/2014/105 dated 03.08.2017.
[B] direct / command the Respondents to the needful for the purpose of his appointment the Petitioner on Compassionate ground.
[C] direct / command the Respondents to take immediate action on the Petitioner's representation dated 15.04.2020.
Page No.# 3/10
2.1. From the statements made in the writ petition, and the documents annexed to the writ petition, it is noticed that the petitioner's date of birth is 25.02.1990. The petitioner passed the High School Living Certificate [HSLC] examination in the year 2007, and the Higher Secondary [HS] examination in the year 2009. Thereafter, the petitioner completed the Bachelor of Arts [B.A.] course from the Golaghat Commerce College under the Dibrugarh University. The petitioner also completed a course, P.G. Diploma in Computer Application in the year 2020.
2.2. The petitioner has stated that due to untimely demise of his father in the year 1992, the family of the petitioner was left with no source of income and has been facing financial stringency since then. On the basis of an application submitted by the petitioner on 08.04.2013 seeking his appointment on compassionate ground, a proposal was recommended to be placed before the District Level Committee [DLC] relating to appointment on compassionate ground for consideration.
2.3. The proposal of the petitioner’s appointment on compassionate ground was placed before the DLC in its meeting, held on 08.10.2013, and the DLC, upon consideration, resolved to recommend the case of the petitioner. On 01.01.2014, the Superintendent of Police, Golaghat forwarded the case of the petitioner to the Director General of Police, Assam along with all the relevant documents and a copy of the Minutes of the DLC meeting, held on 08.10.2013, for further consideration.
2.4. The proposal regarding appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground was, thereafter, placed before the State Level Committee [SLC]. The State Level Committee [SLC] in its meeting, held on 16.10.2015, considered the proposal. After considering the case of the petitioner, the SLC did not recommend the case on the ground of delay in submission of the application. The petitioner was thereafter, informed about the decision taken by the SLC by the Additional Secretary to Government of Assam, Home Department vide an Office Letter dated 03.08.2017. Undeterred by the fact of rejection of the case of the petitioner by the SLC, the petitioner pursued the matter further, and in the subsequent periods, there were
Page No.# 4/10
correspondences among various authorities, regarding the application of the petitioner's appointment on compassionate ground. The petitioner has stated that another Representation was submitted by him on 15.04.2020 for reconsideration of his case of compassionate appointment.
Page No.# 5/10
India. No other mode of appointment or any other consideration is permissible. The government or the public authorities are not at liberty to follow any other procedure or relax the procedure laid down by the rules for the post. This general rule is ordinarily to be followed in every case. However, some exceptions have been carved out in the interest of justice and to meet certain contingencies. One such exception is in favour of the dependents of an employee dying in harness. If the employee as the sole breadwinner of the family expires, leaving his family in penury and without any means of livelihood, then in such a case, an appointment on compassionate ground can be made out of pure humanitarian consideration and taking into consideration the fact that unless some source of livelihood is provided, the family would not be able to make both ends meet. It is taking into such humanitarian angle a policy is ordinarily adopted to provide gainful employment to one of the dependents of the deceased who may be eligible for such employment. The object of granting compassionate appointment is, therefore, to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis befallen on it. It is also settled that mere death of an employee in harness does not entitle his family to such source of livelihood. The financial condition of the family of the deceased is required to be examined thoroughly. Only if it is found that the family will not be able to meet the crisis that has befallen on it due to the sudden demise of the only breadwinner in the family, the provision for employment on compassionate ground can be resorted to. The posts which can be made open and offered for appointment on compassionate ground, are only posts which fall in the categories of Class-III or Class-IV.
6 . For these very reasons, the compassionate employment cannot be granted after a lapse of a reasonable period which must be specified in the rules. The consideration for such employment is not a vested right which can be exercised at any time in future. The object being to enable the family to get over the financial crisis which it faces at the time of the death of the sole breadwinner, the compassionate employment cannot be claimed and
Page No.# 6/10
offered whatever the lapse of time and after the crisis is over.
32.1. That a provision for compassionate appointment makes a departure from the general provisions providing for appointment to a post by following a particular procedure of recruitment. Since such a provision enables appointment being made without following the said procedure, it is in the nature of an exception to the general provisions and must be resorted to only in order to achieve the stated objectives i.e. to enable the family of the deceased to get over the sudden financial crisis.
32.2. Appointment on compassionate grounds is not a source of recruitment. The reason for making such a benevolent scheme by the State or the public sector undertaking is to see that the dependants of the deceased are not deprived of the means of livelihood. It only enables the family of the deceased to get over the sudden financial crisis.
32.3. Compassionate appointment is not a vested right which can be exercised at any time in future. Compassionate employment cannot be claimed or offered after a lapse of time and after the crisis is over.
32.4. That compassionate appointment should be provided immediately to redeem the family in distress. It is improper to keep such a case pending for
Page No.# 7/10
years.
32.5. In determining as to whether the family is in financial crisis, all relevant aspects must be borne in mind including the income of the family, its liabilities, the terminal benefits if any, received by the family, the age, dependency and marital status of its members, together with the income from any other source.
Page No.# 8/10
Page No.# 9/10
years. The said document has been annexed to the counter affidavit of the State respondents and the fact was not disclosed by the petitioner.
Page No.# 10/10
which the afore-said decision of the SLC was conveyed to the petitioner. For the reasons discussed above, no direction to consider the Representation dated 15.04.2020 of the petitioner is called for.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment, made years after his father's death in 1992, could be entertained despite delay and laches.
Whether the SLC's rejection of the compassionate appointment proposal on the ground of delay warranted interference.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of West Bengal vs. Debabrata Tiwari and othersRelied on¶8
[2025] 5 SCC 712 · Who else cites this
Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs. State of HaryanaRelied on¶7
[1994] 4 SCC 138 · Who else cites this
Nabanita Lahkar vs. the State of Assam and 3 othersApplied¶10
Writ Appeal no. 74/2020
Nabanita Lahkar vs. State of Assam and 3 othersApplied¶10
Review Petition no. 83/2020
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Arif Ali
The State of Assam, represented by the Commissioner and Secretary, Home and Political Department
The Superintendent of Police, Golaghat District
The District Level Committee for Selection of Appointment on Compassionate Ground, Golaghat
The State Level Committee for Appointment on Compassionate Ground
Manish Choudhury
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
