Disposed

Atul Borah v. the State of Assam and Othrs

Gauhati HC6 Jan 2026WP(C)/62/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought enforcement of an earlier High Court direction for reconsideration of his compassionate appointment claim under the 5% reserved quota after his father's death in harness. The court held the 2024 Office Memorandum and subsequent executive orders could not override its prior binding direction and disposed of the writ petition requiring compliance.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of in terms of order dated 26.05.2025 in WP(C) No.3370/2024; respondents directed to comply with that order.

Atul Borah Vs the State of Assam and Othrs — Service and Employment | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010287782025

2026:GAU-AS:180

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/62/2026

¶6

ATUL BORAH

¶7

S/O- LATE BOGIRAM BORAH, R/O- VILLAGE- TINGALIBORI, P.O- SIMALUGURI, P.S- GOHPUR, DISTBISWANATH, PIN-784168, ASSAM

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHRS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06

¶10

2:THE CHIEF SECRETARY CUM CHAIRMAN OF THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-06

¶11

3:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION DISPUR GUWAHTI-06

¶12

4:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19

¶13

5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CUM CHAIRMAN OF THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE JORHAT ASSAM PIN-78700

¶14

Page No.# 2/3

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P NEOG, MS. K SHARMA

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, ELEM. EDU

¶17

BEFORE

¶18

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

07.01.2026

¶21

Heard Mr. R. De, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. B Deori, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents and Ms. S. Konwar, learned Standing Counsel, Department of School Education (Elementary). Having regard to the nature of the case projected by the petitioner, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at this stage itself.

¶22

2. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.3370/2024 and the same was disposed of vide order dated 26.05.2025 by setting aside the State Level Committee minutes meeting dated 16.06.2016 insofar as the petitioner was concerned and the petitioner was remanded back to the State Level Committee for reconsidering the case of the petitioner in terms of the recommendation made by the District Level Committee in its meeting held on 11.09.2013. Such direction was made after coming to a finding that there was a clear vacancy for the year 200607 for appointment on compassionate ground under the 5% reserved quota. Despite the direction, since the case of the petitioner has not been considered and the petitioner apprehending that his case will not be considered in view of the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 (Annexure-6) issued by the Government of Assam in the Personnel (B) Department, he has approached this Court once again.

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

3. It is seen that there are no materials to indicate that the order dated 26.05.2025 passed in WP(C) No.3370/2024 has been challenged before the appellate forum and further the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 provides for a bar to only those persons whose parents have expired on or before 31.03.2017, whereas the father of the petitioner admittedly expired/died in harness on 27.03.2012. Therefore, the Office Memorandum cannot be a bar for considering the case of the petitioner. The State Government in the Personnel Department have also issued notice on 30.08.2025 and also an Executive Order dated 30.08.2025. But having regard to the specific direction given by this Court on 26.05.2025 in WP(C) No.3370/2024, the same cannot be a bar for considering the case of the petitioner in terms of the said direction.

¶25

4. In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated 26.05.2025 and the respondent authorities will be required to comply with the same as was directed.

¶26

5. The writ petition stands disposed of.

¶27

JUDGE

¶28

Comparing Assistant

Atul Borah v. the State of Assam and Othrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atul Borah v. the State of Assam and Othrs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Headmaster Tarinipur High School Vs Khudeja Begum

Miss Alaka Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Smti Dipti Das Vs Dr Bijoya Choudhury, Acs

Rowsana Yeasmin Laskar Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Wahida Khatun and 16 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Gayatri Duwarah and 10 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.