Mojindra Ngatey vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 1456 Gua

                                                          Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010087542020




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

                      Case No. : WP(C)/2631/2020

         MOJINDRA NGATEY
         S/O- LT. KALURAM NGATEY, R/O- BHOGPUR PAMUWA MISING
         GAON, P.O. BHURAMORA, P.S. GARAMUR, DIST.- MAJULI, PIN-
         785104, ASSAM



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS.
         REP BY THE CHIEF SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM CUM THE
         CHAIRMAN, STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE (SLC) FOR
         APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND, JANATA
         BHAWAN, DISPUR, GHY-06

         2:THE COMM. AND SPECIAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF
         ASSAM
          PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DEPTT. (PWRD)
          JANATA BHAWAN
          DISPUR
          GHY-06
         ASSAM

         3:THE DY. COMMISSIONER
          JORHAT
         ASSAM CUM CHAIRMAN
          DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE (DLC) FOR APPOINTMENT ON
         COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT
          JORHAT
          PIN- 785001
         ASSAM

         4:THE DY. SECRETARY
                                                              Page No.# 2/5

             TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
             PUBLIC WORKS ROADS DEPTT.
             (ESTT-B) BRANCH
             JANATA BHAWAN
             DISPUR
             GHY-06
             ASSAM

            5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
             PUBLIC WORKS DEPTT.
             JORHAT STATE ROAD DIVISION
             GARAMUR
             JORHAT
             PIN- 785007
            ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. S DUTTA

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PWD ROAD




                            BEFORE
           HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SONGKHUPCHUNG SERTO

                                     ORDER

Date : 19-04-2021

Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also heard Mr. D. Nath, learned Sr. Government Advocate appearing for the State respondents.

The facts and circumstances leading to the filing of this writ petition are:-

The petitioner's father who was working as Assistant Carpenter (Grade-IV) in the office of the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Jorhat State Road Division died on 28/4/2011 while in harness. Being the eldest among the siblings, the petitioner applied for appointment to Grade-IV post on compassionate ground on 17/6/2011. The DLC in its meeting held on 13/3/2013 recommended the name of Page No.# 3/5

the petitioner for appointment to Grade-IV post. Thereafter, the case of the petitioner was placed before the SLC on 19/6/2018 but on 22/11/2018 by a speaking order, his case was rejected on the ground that 5% quota meant for appointment on compassionate ground has been exhausted. Not being satisfied with the rejection order, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) 107/2019 and the same was disposed of by the order dated 10/1/2019. In that order it was directed that the SLC should re-consider the case of the petitioner in terms of the provisions of paragraph 15 of the O.M.ABP.50/2006/Pt/182 dated 1/6/2015 wherein it is provided that in case of non existence of vacancy in the Department where the Government servant concern had served last, the case of an applicant seeking for compassionate appointment should be considered against vacancies available in other Departments. After the said direction was given by this Court, the SLC in their meeting held on 23/12/2019 once again considered the case of the petitioner but rejected it again on the ground that the application had remain pending for a period more than 2 years therefore it has spent its force. Being aggrieved the petitioner is before this Court once again challenging the last order of the SLC rejecting his application.

It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner submitted his application well in time and the DLC also recommended his case for appointment. Therefore, the SLC cannot reject his application on the ground of lapse of time. The learned counsel also submitted that in a similar circumstances, this Court in W.A. No.348/2017 had set aside the order of the SLC rejecting Page No.# 4/5

the application of the petitioner in that writ petition and also directed the SLC to re-consider his case. Therefore, in the same manner the order of the SLC rejecting the case of the petitioner in this case may also be quashed and set aside and the SLC may be directed to re- consider the case of the petitioner. The learned counsel referred to paragraph 3, 6 and 7 of the judgment passed in that case. The paragraphs are reproduced here below:-

3. During the course of hearing, Mr. R. Dhar, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam have produced a copy of the Minutes of the meeting dated 11.08.2017 of the State Level Committee. The said Minutes provides the necessary information with regard to the case of the appellant. It is shown that the case of the appellant pertained to the year 2009 and the State Level Committee considered his case in the meeting held on 01.04.2015 and thereafter on 09.12.2015. However, the appellant was not selected due to want of vacancy. Again, following the Court's order dated 21.09.2016, as aforestated, the appellant's case was considered but, yet again, the State Level Committee held that in the absence of any vacancies and coupled with the fact that more than 8 years have elapsed, the appellant's case no longer falls within the period of consideration for compassionate appointment. Accordingly, the State Level Committee treated his case as having spent its force.

6. On the facts above, we are of the considered view that the case of the appellant for appointment on compassionate grounds was not handled judiciously and by going into the merits of his case. Rejection merely on technical grounds and on ground of want of vacancy does not find support from available records. It also does not inspire the confidence of this Court.

7. We allow this writ appeal and set aside the order dated 16.06.2017 passed in WP(C) 3607/2017 with direction to the Secretary to the Government of Assam, Environment and Forest Department to place the case of the appellant before the State Level Committee in its very next sitting, whereafter the State Level Committee shall consider and decide the appellant's case strictly on merits by having regard to the recommendation made by the District Level Committee, Cachar. Ordered accordingly.

It appears from the facts stated above that the petitioner submitted his application in time and it is only the respondents who delayed the matter. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be made to suffer for the fault he did not commit. Moreover, the DLC has recommended the petitioner's case after taking into consideration all the relevant Page No.# 5/5

facts. Therefore, the SLC should not have rejected the same on the grounds which are irrelevant specially, when this Court had already directed in the order passed in the earlier writ petition to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of the provision of paragraph 15 of the O.M.ABP.50/2006/Pt/182. The respondents cannot go on adding grounds after grounds that too which are baseless for rejecting the application of the petitioner. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of by quashing and setting aside the latest order of the SLC dated 23/12/2019 in respect of the petitioner with a direction that the case of the petitioner should be re-considered afresh keeping in view the recommendation of the DLC and the direction of this Court passed in W.P.(C) 107/2018. Needless to say but the SLC should consider the case of the petitioner in their next meeting.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant