Gauhati High Court
Jugamaya Das vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors on 15 July, 2024
Author: Kalyan Rai Surana
Bench: Kalyan Rai Surana
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010124842024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3449/2024
JUGAMAYA DAS
D/O- LATE PURNAKANTA DAS, ADDRESS- CHETIA KAIBORTA GAON,
MITHA PUKHURI, P.O. BETBARI, P.S. SIVASAGAR, DIST. SIVASAGAR,
ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM,
ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006.
2:THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST AND HEAD OF
FOREST FORCE
ASSAM
PANJABARI
GUWAHATI-781006.
3:THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
EASTERN
ASSAM CIRCLE
JORHAT.
4:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE
SIVASAGAR
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
SIVASAGAR
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S SARMAH
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM
Page No.# 2/5
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
ORDER
Date : 15-07-2024
Heard Mr. S. Sarmah, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. M.
Kalita, learned standing counsel for the Forest Department appearing for the
respondent nos.1 to 4 and Mr. J.K. Goswami, learned Addl. Senior Govt.
Advocate appearing for the respondent no.5.
2. The father of the petitioner namely, Late Purna Kt. Das, Ex-
Forester-II, a Grade-III employee had died-in-harness on 26.08.1999, leaving
behind his wife and two daughters. The date on which the petitioner had
applied for appointment on compassionate ground is not pleaded in the writ
petition. However, on 26.02.2004, the Divisional Forest Officer has forwarded
the petition of the petitioner for appointing her in any post in the Forest
Department to the Conservator of Forest, Eastern Assam Circle, Jorhat.
3. The Conservator of Forest, Eastern Assam Circle forwarded the
petition of the petitioner to the PCCF by a letter dated 16.03.2004. On
07.08.2022, the petitioner had filed a representation before the concerned MLA
for appointing her on compassionate ground. Thereafter on 21.03.2023, the
District Level Committee (DLC for short), Sivasagar is stated to have forwarded
the minutes of the DLC meeting held on 04.02.2023 along with recommendation
by the DLC for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground. The
Conservator of Forest, Eastern, Assam Circle by a letter dated 10.04.2023,
requested the PCCF and HoFF, Assam for appointing the petitioner on
Page No.# 3/5
compassionate ground. However, the name of the petitioner was not placed
before the SLC for consideration till date. Accordingly the petitioner has
approached this Court by filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance in the
judgment of this Court in the case of Dipak Das v. State of Assam and ors.,
2006 Supp GLT 95 to project that this Court had held that the application for
appointment on compassionate ground should be considered with a pragmatic
approach. It is submitted that one year period to apply for appointment should
not be counted with arithmetic precision.
5. The learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate and the learned
standing counsel for the respondents has opposed the prayer made in the writ
petition.
6. Considering the contents of the Office Memorandum dated
01.06.2015 by which under Principle-10, it has been provided that if the
application of the eligible candidates remain pending and cannot be considered
due to lack of vacancies for a period of 2(two) years from the date of making
such application, he will require more further consideration and must be
understood to have spent their force. We also take note of the judgment of the
Supreme Court of India in the case of State of West Bengal v. Debabrata Tiwari,
(2023) 0 Supreme SC 191, wherein it is held that that inordinate delay even on
part of the State to consider their application would make the petitioner
disentitled for consideration for appointment on compassionate ground.
Page No.# 4/5
7. Para 7.4 and 7.5 of the said judgment is quoted below:
"7.4. As noted above, the sine qua non for entertaining a claim for
compassionate appointment is that the family of the deceased employee would be
unable to make two ends meet without one of the dependants of the deceased
employee being employed on compassionate grounds. The financial condition of the
family of the deceased, at the time of the death of the deceased, is the primary
consideration that ought to guide the authorities' decision in the matter.
7.5. Considering the second question referred to above, in the first instance,
regarding whether applications for compassionate appointment could be considered
after a delay of several years, we are of the view that, in a case where, for reasons of
prolonged delay, either on the part of the applicant in claiming compassionate
appointment or the authorities in deciding such claim, the sense of immediacy is
diluted and lost. Further, the financial circumstances of the family of the deceased,
may have changed, for the better, since the time of the death of the government
employee. In such circumstances, Courts or other relevant authorities are to be guided
by the fact that for such prolonged period of delay, the family of the deceased was
able to sustain themselves, most probably by availing gainful employment from some
other source. Granting compassionate appointment in such a case, as noted by this
Court in Hakim Singh would amount to treating a claim for compassionate
appointment as though it were a matter of inheritance based on a line of succession
which is contrary to the Constitution. Since compassionate appointment is not a vested
right and the same is relative to the financial condition and hardship faced by the
dependents of the deceased government employee as a consequence of his death, a
claim for compassionate appointment may not be entertained after lapse of a
considerable period of time since the death of the government employee."
8. The case of the petitioner is that her father had expired on
26.08.1999 which is almost 25 years back.
9. In light of the Principle-10 of the Office Memorandum dated
01.06.2015, read with para-7(X) of the decision of this Court in the case of
Achyut Ranjan Das & Ors. v. State of Assam & Ors., 2005 (4) GLT 674 as well as
in light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Debabrata Tiwari
(supra), the Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is found to be
disentitled for consideration of appointment on compassionate ground
Page No.# 5/5
notwithstanding the projection made by the petitioner that the DLC has
recommended the name of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate
ground.
10. In light of the decision of the Supreme Court of India in the case
of Debabrata Tiwari (supra), the decision of this Court in the case of Dipak Das
(supra) would not have force.
11. Accordingly this writ petition stands dismissed.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
