Dismissed¶30

Rupak Jyoti Das v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Gauhati HC5 Feb 2026WP(C)/7055/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

compassionate appointment; appointment on compassionate ground; State Level Committee; District Level Committee for Compassionate Appointment; absence of vacancy; lapse of time; too late in the day; Panchayat and Rural Development Department Assam; Sivasagar Zilla Parishad; Office Memorandums; State of West Bengal v Debabrata Tiwari; AIR 2023 SC 1467; WP(C)/7055/2021; WP(C)/4223/2019; Gauhati High Court; Rajesh Mazumdar

What did the court decide?

Having regard to the lapse of time since the demise of the petitioner's father, the age at which the petitioner now stands, and the observations of the Apex Court in State of West Bengal v. Debabrata Tiwari (AIR 2023 SC 1467), it is too late in the day for the petitioner to await a consideration on compassionate ground. ¶29

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

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010218702021

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/7055/2021

¶6

RUPAK JYOTI DAS S/O LATE SATYA DAS P.O. GAURISAGAR P.S. GAURISAGAR DIST. SIVASAGAR, ASSAM, PIN-785664

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS

¶9

REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6.

¶10

2:THE COMMISSIONER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ASSAM PANJABARI GUWAHATI-37.

¶11

3:THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

¶12

SIVASAGAR ZILLA PARISHAD SIVASAGAR.

¶13

4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CUM CHAIRMAN

¶14

OF DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT SIVASAGAR DIST. SIVASAGAR ASSAM-785664

¶15

5:THE CHIEF SECRETARY

¶16

ASSAM OF STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND UNDER PANCHAYAT AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

¶17

Page No.# 2/3

¶18

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M K NEOG, MR. M K DUTTA

¶19

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, P AND R.D.

¶20

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR

¶21

ORDER

¶22

06.02.2026

¶23

Heard Mr. M. K. Neog, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. K. Ghosh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. S. Dutta, learned Standing Counsel, P&RD.

¶24

The case of the petitioner in this writ petition is that the father had met his demise on 27^th July, 2016. When the petitioner had not been given the benefit of being considered for appointment on compassionate grounds by the respondent authorities, he had approached this Court by preferring a writ petition bearing WP(C)/4223/2019 which was disposed of by this Court directing the State Level Committee to reconsider the case of the petitioner by examining the availability of vacancy under the department. The petitioner had thereafter submitted a certified copy of the order to the respondents and by an order

¶25

dated 29^th May, 2020, the State Level Committee for appointment on compassionate ground had informed the petitioner that his case had been rejected in the meeting held on 15.02.2019 due to absence of vacancy in the department during 2016-17.

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that although some time has passed since the demise of the father of the petitioner, this case having been not properly dealt with by the respondents till date, the respondents are required to be directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner

¶27

Page No.# 3/3

¶28

in the light of the applicable Office Memorandums regarding appointment on compassionate ground.

¶29

This Court having gone through the materials on record and after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, is of the opinion that the lapse of time which has occurred from the demise of the father of the petitioner, the age at which the petitioner now stands at and the observations made by the Apex Court in the case of State of West Bengal Vs Debabrata Tiwari & Ors. reported in AIR 2023 SC 1467 , it is perhaps too late in the day for the petitioner to await a consideration on compassionate ground. This Court therefore is unable to grant the prayers made in the writ petition and accordingly, the same is rejected.

¶30

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

Comparing Assistant

Rupak Jyoti Das v. the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupak Jyoti 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rangjali Basumatary @ Rangjali Mushahary Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Sarat Ch. Dutta Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Dipanjali Das Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Anjan Hafila Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Ms. Rejina Dekaraja Bordoloi Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Suman Das Vs the Union of India and 7 Ors.