Saurav Sarma vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 2880 Gua

                                                                    Page No.# 1/6

GAHC010092212022




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

                          Case No. : WP(C)/3199/2022

         SAURAV SARMA
         S/O- LT. DURLAV SARMA, R/O-VILLAGE GHOPA, P.O.- DIGHIRPAR, DIST-
         DARRANG, ASSAM.



         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS
         REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPTT. OF
         P.W.D.(ROADS), DISPUR, GHY.-06.

         2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
          PWD(ROADS)
          CHANDMARI
          GHY.-781003.

         3:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
          P.W.D.
          MANGALDOI STATE ROAD DIVISION
          MANGALDOI
          DIST.- DARRANG
         ASSAM.

         4:THE DY. COMMISSIONER
          DARRANG DISTRICT
          DARRANG
          MANGALDOI
          DIST.- DARRANG
         ASSAM.

         5:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE
         TO BE REP. BY THE DY. COMMISSIONER
          DARRANG DISTRICT
                                                                           Page No.# 2/6

             DARRANG
             MANGALDOI
             DIST- DARRANG
             ASSAM.

            6:THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE
            TO BE REP. BY THE CHAIRMAN
             DISPUR
             GUWAHATI- 781006
             DIST.- KAMRUP(M)
            ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. M K SHARMA

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, P W D




                                  BEFORE
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

                                          ORDER

Date : 10.08.2022

Heard Mr. M. K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Nayak, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1, 2 & 3 and Mr. J. K. Parajuli, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 4, 5 & 6.

2) The petitioner's case in brief is that the petitioner's father died-in- harness on 23.06.2014, while the petitioner was a minor.

3) The petitioner's sister Mrinali Sarma thereafter, filed an application for compassionate appointment before the respondent no. 3, within 45 days from the date of death of the petitioner's father. However, the application was not acted upon.

4) The petitioner's counsel submits that as the petitioner's sister's Page No.# 3/6

application for compassionate appointment was not being acted upon by the respondent authorities, the petitioner submitted an application in March 2016, and another on 11.01.2017 for compassionate appointment, while still being a minor.

5) The District Level Committee (DLC) recommended the petitioner for compassionate appointment, vide its meeting minutes dated 02.06.2018. The petitioner was recommended for appointment to the post of Section Assistant.

6) The State Level Committee (SLC) thereafter, in its meeting minutes dated 31.12.2018 rejected the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment on three grounds. Firstly, on the ground that the petitioner had applied one year after the date of death of his father. Secondly, on the ground that compassionate appointment could not be made within the 5% quota of posts reserved for compassionate appointment and thirdly, on the ground that the petitioner was under qualified for the post that the petitioner had applied for i.e., Section Assistant (Grade-III post).

7) The petitioner's counsel submits that in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015 issued by the Govt. of Assam, Department of Personnel, Personnel (B), if there are no vacant post for appointment on compassionate ground within the 5% quota of posts reserved for compassionate appointment, then in terms of Clause-15 of the Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015, the Administrative Department/Office was to take up with other Departments/Offices of the Govt., the issue of giving compassionate appointment, to accommodate those persons who are in the waiting list.

Page No.# 4/6

8) The petitioner's counsel also submits that petitioner should have been considered for a Grade-IV post, even though the petitioner had applied for compassionate appointment to a Grade-III post only. He also submits that though the petitioner was a minor at the time of submission of his application for compassionate appointment, the same should not have been a bar for the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner.

9) Mr. P. Nayak, and Mr. J. K. Parajuli, learned counsel for the respondents submit that the petitioner had submitted his application for compassionate appointment while he was a minor and in terms of the Judgement of the Apex Court in Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of Bihar reported in 2007 (7) SCC 192, there cannot be reservation of a vacancy in the matters of compassionate appointment, till such time a claimant becomes a major. They also submit that in terms of the Judgement of this Court in Faziron Nessa Vs. State of Assam and Another reported in 2010(4) GLT 364 and Clause 3 of the Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015, an application for compassionate appointment has to be submitted within one year from the date of death of the Govt. servant. They accordingly pray that the writ petition should be dismissed.

10) I have considered the submissions made by the counsels for the parties and I find that the petitioner's father had expired on 23.06.2014 and the petitioner's sister had filed an application for compassionate appointment, the fate of which, the petitioner's counsel submits that he does not know. Besides the above, the petitioner, while still being a minor had submitted two applications for compassionate appointment i.e. in March 2016 and on 11.01.2017.

Page No.# 5/6

11) In the case of Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of Bihar (Supra), the Apex Court has held that there cannot be reservation of a vacancy till such time a claimant becomes a major. As the petitioner's father had expired on 23.06.2014, this Court finds that the said judgment is applicable to the facts of dismiss. Further, the object of compassionate appointment is to give immediate relief to the family of the deceased bread earner.

12) In the case of Faziron Nessa Vs. State of Assam and Another (Supra), and in Clause 3 of the Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015, issued by Govt. of Assam, it has been clearly stipulated that an application for compassionate appointment should be submitted within one year from the date of death of the Govt. servant. In this case, the petitioner had submitted his application for compassionate appointment after the one year period stipulated by this Court and the Govt. Further, the petitioner's sister had already submitted an application for compassionate appointment, which can still be pursued by the concerned person and as the said application would also be for the purpose of providing relief to the entire family, which would consist of petitioner herein also, this Court is of the view that there is no infirmity with the rejection of the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment on the ground of late submission of his application.

13) Added to the above facts, the petitioner had made an application for compassionate appointment only in respect to a Grade-III post, while not having the educational qualification for the same. As the petitioner's counsel has admitted that the petitioner did not have the qualification of Higher Secondary Science, there is no infirmity in the rejection of the petitioner's application, on Page No.# 6/6

the ground of the petitioner being under qualified.

14) Another factor which has to be considered is that while the SLC had rejected the petitioner's application on 31.12.2018, the petitioner has filed the writ petition only on 12.05.2022, which is around three and half years from the date of the decision take by the SLC. As such, there is a delay in filing the writ petition.

15) In view of the reasons stated above, this Court is not inclined to exercise its discretion in the present case. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant