Hanif Ahmed Laskar vs The State Of Assam And 3 Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 22 Gua

                                                                  Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010220482021




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

                                 Case No. : WP(C)/7344/2021

            HANIF AHMED LASKAR
            S/O-LATE ISAQUE ALI LASKAR,
            VILL- UJANKUPA-II, P.O- UJANKUPA,
            DIST- HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN-788152



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS
            REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
            EDUCATION DEPARTMENT( ELEMENTARY), DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06

            2:THE DIRECTOR
             OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
            ASSAM
             KAHILIPARA
             GHY-19

            3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
             HAILAKANDI
             P.O AND DIST- HAILAKANDI
            ASSAM
             PIN- -788151

            4:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER
             HAILAKANDI
             P.O AND DIST- HAILAKANDI
            ASSAM
             PIN- -78815

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. N HOSSAIN

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU

Page No.# 2/4

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL) Date: 03.01.2022 Heard Mr. N Hossain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. PK Borah, learned counsel for the respondents No.1, 2 and 4 being the authorities under the Elementary Education Department, Government of Assam and Mr. Girin Pegu, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 being the Deputy Commissioner, Hailakandi.

2. The father of the petitioner namely Lt. Isaque Ali Laskar who was serving as an Assistant Teacher in the Sibuttar (provincialised) ME Institute in the Hailakandi district died in harness on 19.05.2007 and on his death, the petitioner submitted an application for compassionate appointment on 17.01.2008. Admittedly, the said application was submitted within a period of one year from the date of death of the person concerned. But at the same time, it is also an admitted position that on the date when the petitioner submitted the application for compassionate appointment he was of the age of 15 years 8 months 26 days and therefore not entitled for a government employment. But again the application of the petitioner was kept pending by the respondent authorities and was not placed before the concerned DLC for its consideration. In the circumstance, the said application was placed before the DLC of Hailakandi district only on 05.10.2021, on which date admittedly the petitioner was around 29 years old. The DLC through its minutes of 05.10.2021 rejected Page No.# 3/4

the claim of the petitioner on the ground that on the date of submission of the application he was 15 years 8 months 26 days.

3. Being aggrieved, this writ petition is instituted. The law of compassionate appointment has its own procedure and principles to be followed and the general principle applicable to a regular recruitment would not be applicable. It was always open for the respondent authorities to have rejected the application of the petitioner on the ground that he had not attained the requisite age for a government employment, provided the said application was placed before the DLC concerned at the appropriate time. But having not done so and allowing the application to remain pending for almost more than 13 years, now the ground of its rejection that the petitioner was 15 years 8 months 26 days on the date of submission of the application would be inapplicable, inasmuch as, it is an application for compassionate appointment and not an application for regular recruitment.

4. For an application for regular recruitment, the principle of law that the eligibility for appointment must be satisfied on the date of application cannot be borrowed and made applicable in case of an application for compassionate appointment and in the instant case, precisely that has been done. From the said point of view, we are unable to accept the reasons for rejection of the application of the petitioner by the DLC of 05.10.2021 and accordingly we interfere with the order of rejection. The application of the petitioner shall now be again placed before the DLC of Hailakandi district in its next meeting to be considered as per the prevailing law without it being rejected on the aforesaid ground.

Page No.# 4/4

5. Writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant