Sri Kishore Malakar Vs the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Heard Mr. P.K. Deka, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, PWD, Assam for respondent Nos. 1, 2 5 and 6. Also heard Ms. A. Talukdar, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam for respondent Nos. 3, 4, 7 and 9.

¶31

Page No.# 3/6

¶32

2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider for appointment in Grade-IV post on compassionate ground. The petitioner has also challenged the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024, issued by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Personnel Department, Dispur, Guwahati -6 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 whereabouts 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.

¶33

3 . The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that his father late Kutu Malakar @ Kumai Malakar was working as Muster Roll Labour (M.R. Labour), under PWRD, Cachar, Silchar and whose service was regularized as Grade-IV employee vide office order dated 27.10.2025, had died-in-harness on 27.07.2009. The petitioner applied for appointment on compassionate ground for Grade-IV post which was forwarded on 25.02.2010 to the concerned authorities.

¶34

4 . It is the contention of the petitioner that since the respondent authorities did not consider the case of the petitioner, he again had approached the respondent authorities on 12.05.2016 for appointment on compassionate ground. Finally, the District Level Committee (DLC) recommended the case of the petitioner vide DLC minutes dated 02.02.2022 for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground before the State Level Committee (SLC).

¶35

Page No.# 4/6

¶36

However, the State Level Committee has rejected the same. Thereafter, again on interference of some authorities, the name of the petitioner was again recommended Vide minutes of the DLC dated 02.02.2022, which is pending for consideration.

¶37

5 . It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that while the matter was pending before the concerned authority for consideration, the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 was issued illegally, which deprived the right of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground as per the relevant provisions of Office Memorandum and the Policy of the State. He submits that this writ petition may be disposed of on the basis of the decision of judgment and order dated 03.04.2025 passed in WP(C) 342/2025 ( Abdul Kadir Bokshi

¶38

–vs- State of Assam) and batch of writ petitions, wherein the respondents authorities have been directed to consider the cases of the petitioners.

¶39

6 . The contention of the petitioner is that the verification for consideration of appointment on compassionate ground have already been carried out. However, due to issuance of impugned notification dated 18.09.2024, the respondent authorities have denied their right of appointment on compassionate ground.

¶40

7 . The parties have fairly submitted that the coordinate bench of this court vide judgment and order dated 03.04.2025 passed in WP(C) 342/2025 ( Abdul Kadir Bokshi –vs- State of Assam) and other batch of writ petitions involving similar nature of cases, has disposed of the matters and directed the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner without interfering

¶41

Page No.# 5/6

¶42

with the impugned order dated 18.09.2024 and therefore, they have agreed and consented that the order dated 03.04.2025 covers the cases of the present petitioner.

¶43

8 . 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 dated 03.04.2025 in the writ petition (supra) covers the cases of the present petitioner as the challenge made in this petition is also to the notification dated 18.09.2024.

¶44

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

¶45

i) The cases of the petitioner for compassionate appointment shall be considered and disposed of by the concerned DLC/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.

¶46

(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.

¶47

Page No.# 6/6

¶48

10 . 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 cases that as being disposed of by way of this order and as such, the application for compassionate appointment should be disposed of by the concerned authorities on merit, as they deem it 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 also directed that while deciding the application for compassionate appointment, the respondents cannot take recourse to the impugned OM dated 18.09.2024, though the judgment in the case of State of West Bengal –Vs. - Debabrata Tiwari reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 219 , may be considered/applied by the concerned authorities.

¶49

11 . The writ petition stands disposed of, accordingly.

¶50

Comparing Assistant

Sri Kishore Malakar v. the State of Assam and 9 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Kishore Malakar v. the State of Assam and 9 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sayed Ahmed Mazarbhuiya Vs the State of Assam and 6 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.

Sahab Uddin Mazumder Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Ibadur Rahman Laskar Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

No. 010025655 Ct/Gd Shrawan Kumar Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors.