Gauhati High Court
Raktim Rabi Boruah vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 9 June, 2025
Author: Suman Shyam
Bench: Suman Shyam
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010095462025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2433/2025
RAKTIM RABI BORUAH
S/O LATE LAMBIT BORUAH
VILL- BORAJAN CHAPORI
P.O.AND P.S. GHILAMARA
DIST. LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM
PIN-787053
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006.
2:THE CHAIRMAN OF THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE (SLC)
FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-781006
3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
ASSAM
PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-781006.
4:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6.
5:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER (DEEO)
Page No.# 2/5
NORTHLAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
PIN-787001.
6:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CUM CHAIRMAN OF DISTRICT LEVEL
COMMITTEE (DLC)
LAKHIMPUR FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND
NORTH LAKHIMPUR
ASSAM
PIN-78700
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N HOSSAIN, MR. M MONDAL
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU, GA, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
ORDER
09.06.2025
Heard Mr. N. Hossain, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard
Mr. J. K. Goswami, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam,
appearing for the respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6. None has appeared for the
respondent Nos.4 and 5 although the name of the learned Standing Counsel is
duly reflected in the Cause List.
The grievance of the petitioner pertains to rejection of his case for
consideration for appointment on compassionate ground.
The father of the petitioner, who was serving as a Sub-Engineer in the
office of the Executive Engineer, PWD, Lakhimpur, died in harness on 09.10.2009.
After the death of the Government servant, who was the sole bread earner of
the family, the petitioner had submitted an application on 31.01.2011 seeking
Page No.# 3/5
appointment on compassionate ground. Vide resolution adopted in the
meeting of the District Level Committee (DLC) held on 07.07.2023, petitioner's
case was recommended for appointment on compassionate ground. However,
despite the lapse of several years, no decision was taken by the State Level
Committee (SLC) in the matter, as a result of which, the matter remained
pending. However, in the wake of the OM dated 18.09.2024 issued by the
Government of Assam, imposing a complete ban on appointment on
compassionate ground, the petitioner's claim has now been extinguished.
Aggrieved thereby, he has approached this Court by filing the instant writ
petition inter-alia assailing the OM dated 18.09.2024.
By referring to the recent judgement of a coordinate Bench rendered on
03.04.2025 in WP(C) 342/2025 and the batch of connected writ petitions as well
as the subsequent order dated 28.05.2025 passed by this Court in WP(C) No.
2849/2025, Mr. Hossain has submitted that the case of his client deserves to be
considered by the SLC in the light of the observations made in the judgement
and order dated 03.04.2025.
After going through the judgement and order dated 03.04.2025, I find that
although the learned Single Judge has clarified that the observations made
therein would not lay down a binding precedent, yet, there are certain
directions and observations, which, in the opinion of this Court, would have a
relevant bearing in the outcome of the present petition.
In the judgement and order dated 03.04.2025, the learned Single Judge
has made the following observations in paragraphs 9 & 10, which are
reproduced herein below for ready reference :-
Page No.# 4/5
"9. In view of the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, all
the writ petitions that are pending as on today, i.e., 03.04.2025, in the
Gauhati High Court, which have put to challenge the impugned OM
dated 18.09.2024, are to be decided as follows:-
(i) All the applications for compassionate appointment
submitted by the petitioners shall be considered and disposed of
by the concerned DLC/SLC on merit, by taking into consideration
the various guidelines prior to 01.04.2017, laid down by the State
Government for compassionate appointment and the judgments
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the High Court. Consequently,
the rejection of all compassionate appointments by the DLC/SLC,
which have been put to challenge and are pending in the
Gauhati High Court as on 03.04.2025, are set aside.
(ii) The entire process for considering the various applications
for compassionate appointment and the decision to be taken in
each case by the concerned authorities, should be completed
within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified
copy of this order by the concerned District Commissioner, who is
also the Chairman of the DLC, if the matter pertains to the DLC. In
other cases, the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam,
who is the Chairman of the SLC, if the matter pertains the SLC.
10. It is made clear that in view of the consent of the parties, this
Court has not gone into the merits of any of the petitioners' cases that
are being disposed of by way of this order and as such, the applications
for compassionate appointment should be disposed of by the
concerned authorities on merit, as they deem it fit and proper. The
decision/s to be taken by the concerned authorities should be based on
reasons and the decision taken should be communicated to the
petitioners thereafter. It is also directed that while deciding the
applications for compassionate appointment, the respondents cannot
take recourse to the impugned OM dated 18.09.2024, though the
judgment provided therein, i.e., the case of Debabrata Tiwari (supra),
Page No.# 5/5
can be considered/applied by the concerned authorities. It is again
made clear that this order cannot be used as a precedent for cases that
are filed on 04.04.2025 and thereafter. It shall only apply to cases that are
pending before this Court as on 03.04.2025."
Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and for the
ends of justice, I am of the view that the petitioner's case deserves to be considered in
the light of the aforementioned observations. As such, this writ petition is being
disposed of at the stage of motion hearing by providing that the petitioner's case be
considered by the SLC in the light of the observations made in paragraphs 9 & 10 of
the judgement and order dated 03.04.2025 and appropriate decision, as may be
permissible under the law, be taken in the matter.
Whatever be the outcome of the process, the same be intimated to the
petitioner, in writing, without any undue delay.
With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
