Gauhati High Court
Ujjal Gogoi vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 11 September, 2023
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010181502023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/5187/2023
UJJAL GOGOI
S/O LATE CHINMOY GOGOI, R/O VILL-THURAJAN GRANT GAON, P.O.-
MORANGI, P.S.-GOLAGHAT, DIST-GOLAGHAT, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.
TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, PWD (ESTABLISHMENT-B) DEPARTMENT,
DISPUR, GUWAHATI-6
2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER
PWD (ROADS)
ASSAM
CHANDMARI
GUWAHATI-3
3:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PWD GOLAGHAT RURAL ROAD DIVISION
GOLAGHAT
4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
GOLAGHAT
DIST-GOLAGHAT
ASSAM
5:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE
TO BE REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN CUM DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
GOLAGHAT
DIST-GOLAGHAT
ASSAM
Page No.# 2/4
6:THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE
TO BE REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN CUM CHIEF SECRETARY
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A I HUSSAIN
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PWD
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
ORDER
11.09.2023.
Heard Shri MAI Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner, who has
approached this Court with a claim for appointment on compassionate ground.
2. The case of the petitioner is that his father, Chinmoy Gogoi, who was
working as a Section Assistant in the office of the Executive Engineer, PWD,
Golahat Rural Road Division, had died-in-harness on 31.03.2015.
3. The petitioner contends that his application made for appointment on
compassionate ground was recommended by the District Level Committee
(DLC), Golaghat in its meeting held on 16.11.2015. However, the State Level
Committee (SLC), Assam has rejected the case of the petitioner on 31.12.2018
on the ground of under qualification.
4. Shri CKS Baruah, learned State Counsel has, however, submitted that there
is no inordinate delay in approaching this Court.
Page No.# 3/4
5. On the issue of this delay, Shri Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner
has submitted that he was approaching the authorities and only in March 2023,
the minutes of the SLC was furnished.
6. A Court exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is
essentially a Court of equity wherein the conduct of the parties is of paramount
importance and such conduct touches upon the aspect of due diligence of the
parties approaching the Court. Though an explanation has been said to be given
that the petitioner was approaching the authorities to know the outcome of the
decision of the SLC, such explanation is not acceptable in view of the fact that
there are other avenues to know about the outcome, including the right under
the Right to Information Act which has not been recourse to. In any case, the
sole objective of the Scheme for compassionate appointment being to give
immediate succor to a bereaved family which has lost its sole bread winner
would not be applicable in the instant case where the death was in March 2015.
7. Shri Hussain, learned counsel has relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court dated 20.05.2022 in the case of Malaya Nanda Sethy Vs. State
of Orissa & Ors. in Civil Appeal No. 4103/2022 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme
Court had observed that the authorities also should not delay in matters of
considering application for appointment on compassionate ground so that the
objective of the Scheme is not lost.
8. However, the facts of this instant case are distinguishable inasmuch as
there was no delay in such consideration as the rejection is of the year 2018
itself. That apart, rejection of the SLC also contains ground which in the opinion
of this Court cannot be held to be irrelevant.
Page No.# 4/4
9. Under such circumstances, the instant writ petition stands dismissed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
