Sayed Ahmed Mazarbhuiya Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

5:THE DISTRICT LEVEL SCRUTINY COMMITTEE FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN CUM DISTRICT COMMISSIONER HAILAKANDI P.O. AND DIST- HAILAKANDI ASSAM PIN-788151

¶17

Page No.# 2/4

¶18

6:THE DISTRICT ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY OFFICER HAILAKANDI

¶19

P.O. AND DIST- HAILAKANDI

¶20

PIN-788151

¶21

7:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT DISPUR GHY-0

¶22

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M KHAN, MS J AKTAR,MR A K DAS

¶23

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, A.H and V. DEPT., GA, ASSAM

¶24

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Date : 08-04-2025

¶27

Heard Mr. A.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M.M. Kataki, learned standing counsel, A.H and V. Department and Ms. A. Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondent No.3.

¶28

2. By filing this petition, the petitioner has put to challenge the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024, issued by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Personnel Department, whereby, it is decided that no cases for appointment on compassionate ground to the family members of the state government employees who died-in-harness or retired prematurely on being declared permanently incapacitated in service or missing and whose whereabout is not known prior to 31.03.2017, shall be entertained by any Administrative Department/Authority for any reason, whatsoever nor be placed before SLCs/DLCs for recommendation of candidate for appointment on compassionate ground.

¶29

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that his father late Abdul Jabbar Mazarbhuiya, while serving as Livestock Inspector under the District Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Officer, Hailakandi, diedin-harness on 12.01.2017. Being the dependent son, he submitted an application on 16.03.2017 for appointment on compassionate ground before the District Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Officer, Hailakandi.

¶30

Page No.# 3/4

¶31

4. Upon receipt of the application for appointment on compassionate ground of the petitioner, initially the District Level Committee had rejected the claim of the petitioner due to non-availability of vacancy in the department. Aggrieved of such rejection, the petitioner approached this Court being WP(C) 5260/2018, which was disposed of on 18.11.2022, directing the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner as per Clause 15 of the Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015. Pursuant thereto, the respondent authorities particularly, the District Level Committee on 19.09.2013, recommended the case of the petitioner for the post of UB Constable.

¶32

5. It is the contention of the petitioner that before the recommendation of the DLC could be considered by the State Level Committee in terms of the relevant Office Memorandum, the impugned Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 has been issued, whereby, a decision has been taken that no cases for compassionate appointment shall be entertained by the SLCs/DLCs, which has deprived the right of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground under the relevant Office Memorandum/Policy of the State.

¶33

6. Learned counsel for the parties, without arguing the matter on merit, have fairly submitted that this Court in the case of Abdul Kadir Bokshi –vs- State of Assam in WP(C) 342/2025 and other batch of writ petitions, vide order dated 03.04.2025, has directed the respondent authorities to consider the cases of the petitioners for compassionate appointment. Therefore, the above order dated 03.04.2025 passed in WP(C) 342/2025 is squarely covers the case of the present petitioner and as such, have prayed for dispose of the present petition by providing similar relief as provided to the petitioner in WP(C) 342/2025 and other batch of writ petitions.

¶34

7. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the order dated 03.04.2025 in WP(C) 342/2025 and other batch of writ petitions, I am of the considered view that the order in the writ petition (supra) covers the case of the present petitioner as the challenge made in this petition is also to the notification dated 18.09.2024. In respectful agreement and as a judicial discipline, the writ petitioner is also provided with the similar relief as provided in the order dated 03.04.2025.

¶35

8. As agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶36

i) The case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment shall be considered and disposed of by the concerned SLC on merit, by taking into consideration the various guidelines prior to 01.04.2017, laid down by the State Government for compassionate appointment and the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the High Court.

¶37

Page No.# 4/4

¶38

(ii) The entire process for considering the application for compassionate appointment and the decision to be taken by the concerned authorities, should be completed within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam, who is the Chairman of the SLC.

¶39

9 . It is made clear that in view of the consent of the parties, this Court has not gone into the merit of the petitioner’s case that is being disposed of by this order and as such, the application for compassionate appointment should be disposed of by the concerned authorities on merit, as deem fit and proper. The decision/s to be taken by the concerned authorities should be based on reasons and the decision taken should be communicated to the petitioner thereafter. It is further directed that while deciding the application for compassionate appointment, the respondents would not take recourse to the impugned OM dated 18.09.2024, however, the judgment in the case of State of West Bengal –vsDebabrata Tiwari and others reported in 2023 SCC Online 219 , can be considered/applied by the concerned authorities.

¶40

10 . The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶41

JUDGE

¶42

Comparing Assistant

Sayed Ahmed Mazarbhuiya v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sayed Ahmed Mazarbhuiya v. the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arjun Das and 26 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Abul Hussain and 21 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Kalyan Kishore Nath and 22 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gopal Sonar and 27 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Md. Baharul Islam Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Tankeswar Saharia and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.