Dismissed¶26

Alok Shankar Das v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC5 Mar 2026WP(C)/1221/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court, WP(C)/1221/2026, decided 06.03.2026 by Justice Soumitra Saikia; Alok Shankar Das v. State of Assam and 4 Ors (DGP Assam; DG Civil Defence & Commandant General Home Guards; IGP Training & Armed Police; Commandant 1st Assam Special Reserve Force Battalion / 29th Assam Police Battalion, Barjar, Nalbari). Compassionate appointment in Armed Branch (ASRF); prayer for reallocation/transfer to Unarmed Branch and disposal of representations dated 03.11.2025 and 01.12.2025; held that existence of a legal right is sine qua non for mandamus; no rules/notifications/office memorandums cited; writ petition dismissed without costs.

What did the court decide?

Upon hearing counsel and perusing the pleadings, no ground was urged before the Court as to why the petitioner should be reallocated to the Unarmed Branch. ¶21

Alok Shankar Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors. — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents ought to be directed to dispose of the petitioner's representations dated 03.11.2025 and 01.12.2025 seeking reallocation from the Armed Branch (ASRF/29 AP Battalion) to the Unarmed Branch. +1 more

¶20

Court's answer

Upon hearing counsel and perusing the pleadings, no ground was urged before the Court as to why the petitioner should be reallocated to the Unarmed Branch.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner secured employment on compassionate ground and not through the procedure prescribed for selection and recruitment to the post by the State Government ordinarily.

¶24

Key takeaways

No rules, notifications or office memorandums were referenced to show that a reallocation procedure is applicable to the petitioner or that rights thereunder accrued and were denied; accordingly, no violation of a constitutional/legal right is made out.ratio¶24
Existence of a legal right is a sine qua non for seeking a direction in the nature of mandamus or any writ of a like nature.ratio¶25
The petitioner failed to show any reason why he is unsuitable to perform his duties in the Armed Branch to which he was appointed on compassionate ground; the writ petition, being bereft of grounds and merit, is liable to be dismissed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Soumitra Saikia, J.), WP(C)/1221/2026, order dated 06.03.2026: Alok Shankar Das, appointed on compassionate ground by order No. ASRF Bn-I/R/3/VOL-IV/2022/337 dated 23.09.2022 to ASRF BN-I (renamed 29th Assam Police Battalion), Barjar, Nalbari, sought a direction to dispose of his representations dated 03.11.2025 and 01.12.2025 for reallocation from the Armed Branch to the Unarmed Branch, citing health concerns and the need to care for his 71-year-old mother. Held: no ground was urged establishing entitlement to reallocation; the appointment being on compassionate ground, it was not made through the prescribed selection and recruitment procedure; no rules, notifications or office memorandums were cited conferring a right to reallocation; existence of a legal right is a sine qua non for mandamus; writ petition dismissed, with the Court refraining from imposing costs in view of the compassionate appointment.

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010005992026

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/1221/2026

¶6

ALOK SHANKAR DAS

¶7

S/O. LATE DEBENDRA CHANDRA DAS, VILL. CHANDRAPUR, P.O.BHAKATPUR, P.S. -SILCHAR, DIST.-CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN 788005

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, HOME DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI - 781006.

¶10

2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (A) ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI- 781007

¶11

3:GENERALTHE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CIVIL DEFENCE AND COMMANDANT GENERAL OF HOME GUARDS ASSAM BELTOLA GUWAHATI- 781007 4:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (TRAINING AND ARMED POLICE) ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI- 781007

¶12

5:THE COMMANDANT 1ST ASSAM SPECIAL RESERVE FORCE BATALION (RENAMED 29TH ASSAM POLICE BATTALION) BARJAR NALBARI

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

ASSAM- 78134

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S B LASKAR, MR. H A LASKAR,MS D DUTTA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM,

¶16

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

¶17

ORDER

¶18

06.03.2026

¶19

Heard Mr. S.B. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. J.K. Goswami, learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate for the State respondents.

¶20

2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 03.11.2025 & 01.12.2025, whereby the petitioner who was appointed on the compassionate ground in the ASRF BN-I, Barjar, Nalbari District under the Directorate of Civil Defence and Home and Guards, Assam. The grievance of the petitioner is that because of some health concerns as he is required to take care of his old aged mother, who is aged about 71 years old, he wants to be reallocated to an Unarmed Branch. His prayers have not been considered therefore, this writ petition has been filed.

¶21

3. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the pleadings, it is seen that no ground has been urged before the Court as to why the petitioner should be reallocated to Unarmed Branch. He was appointed vide order No. ASRF Bn-I/R/3/VOL-IV/2022/337 dated 23.09.2022 on

¶22

Page No.# 3/4

¶23

compassionate ground at ASRF BN-I, Barjar, Nalbari, District:Nalbari.

¶24

4. The fact remains that the petitioner was appointed to the ASRF Branch (which is renamed as 29 AP Battalion) on compassionate ground. The petitioner did not secure his appointed by the procedure which is prescribed for selection and recruitment to the post by the State Government ordinarily. Having secured employment under the compassionate ground the petitioner is now expressing his difficulty in carrying on the job at the Armed Branch and seeks a transfer to Unarmed Branch. No reference to any rules, notifications or office memorandums have been made to suggest that such a procedure is applicable and the petitioner’s rights under such provisions have accrued which have been denied to by the respondent authorities and thereby, some constitutional legal right of the petitioner has been violated.

¶25

5. The writ petition is bereft of any grounds explaining as to why the prayer made by the petitioner, which had not been considered by the authorities, is required to be entertained by this Court. The petitioner is also failed to show any reason why he is unsuitable to perform his duties in the Armed Branch to which he was appointed on the compassionate ground. Under such circumstances this Court does not find any merit in the writ petition and observed that as for seeking direction in the nature of mandamus or any writ of a like nature the existences of a legal right is a sine quo non.

¶26

6. In that view of the matter this Court finds that the writ petition is in bereft of any merit and therefore, stands dismissed.

¶27

Page No.# 4/4

¶28

7. The Court in view of the fact that the petitioner was appointed on the compassionate ground restrained itself from imposing any cost.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

Alok Shankar Das v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alok Shankar Das v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prof Dr Dipak Kumar Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Arafad Alom Bora Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Dambrudhar Basumatary and 44 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.

Bidhan Das Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Ranjumala Devi Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Sri Bhupen Kakati and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.