Gauhati High Court
Abhijit Kalita vs The State Of Assam And 5 Ors on 20 May, 2025
Author: Nelson Sailo
Bench: Nelson Sailo
Page No.# 1/6
GAHC010172182023
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4488/2023
ABHIJIT KALITA
S/O- LATE SAILEN KALITA, R/O- VILLAGE- RAMPUR, P.O. RAMPUR, P.S.
PALASBARI, PIN- 781132, DIST.- KAMRUP, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, GOVT. OF
ASSAM, ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPARTMENT, GUWAHATI, DISPUR-
06
2:THE CHIEF SECRETARY
GOVT. OF ASSAM
DISPUR
KAMRUP (M)
GUWAHATI-06
ASSAM
3:THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER
FOREST RESOURCES SURVEY DIVISION
SANTIPUR
GUWAHATI-09
4:THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST RESEARCH
EDUCATION AND WORKING PLAN
PANJABARI
GUWAHATI-37
5:THE CHAIRMAN
DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE
KAMRUP (M)
PIN- 781001
Page No.# 2/6
ASSAM
6:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
KAMRUP (M)
PIN- 781001
ASSA
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B P BORAH, MR. J KALITA,DIKSHITA DEKA,MR P J
DUTTA,MR H MAZUMDER
Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, FOREST
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO
ORDER
20.05.2025
Heard Mr. J Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. A Talukdar,
learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2, 5 & 6. None appears for the
remaining respondents. Having regard to the projection made by the petitioner,
the writ petition is taken up for disposal at this stage.
[2.] This is the second time the petitioner is before this Court. The first writ
petition in WP(C) No. 6061/2022 was disposed of vide Order dated 21.11.2022
by directing the respondent authorities to communicate the outcome of the
decision held by the District Level Committee (DLC), which held its meeting on
19.06.2018. The petitioner was, thereafter, accordingly communicated the DLC's
Page No.# 3/6
decision dated 19.06.2018 wherein, it was remarked that the application of the
petitioner is rejected due to late submission of the application. Mr. J Kalita,
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in fact, after the father of the
petitioner expired/died in harness on 13.02.2015, the petitioner had
immediately submitted his application for compassionate appointment. However,
a copy of the same was not retained by him, which led him to file his second
application.
[3.] The learned counsel submits that at any rate, it is not the DLC but the
State Level Committee (SLC), who should consider the case of the petitioner
since his father was an employee of the Forest Department, working as Forester
Grade-I. In this connection, the learned counsel has referred to the Meeting
Minutes of the SLC for appointment on compassionate grounds dated
01.04.2015, which was chaired by the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Assam in which
reference was made to Personnel (B) Department's U/O No. 215/207 dated
25.06.2007 and the Government's direction issued vide FRE. 105/2004/246
dated 11.07.2007 wherein, the requirement for recommendation by the DLC for
the Forest Department was dispensed with, keeping in mind the fact that an
Appointing Authority for the post of Grade-III and Grade-IV in the Forest
Department is the PCCF and not the District Level Official. Therefore, it was
Page No.# 4/6
stated that the requirement for having a recommendation by the DLC did not
apply to the cadre of employees in the Forest Department. The learned counsel
for the petitioner, therefore, submits that in view of such instructions, the case
of the petitioner should be considered by the SLC and not by the DLC.
[4.] The learned counsel has also drawn the attention of this Court to the
Order dated 03.04.2025 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C)
No. 342/2025 (Abdul Kadir Bokshi vs. State of Assam & 4 Ors.) wherein, a
number of case were disposed of by a common order. Challenge made by the
petitioners therein was to the O.M dated 18.09.2024 by which the scheme for
compassionate appointment had been done away with for all those family
members of the Government servants, who died in harness prior to 01.04.2017.
This Court, by taking into account the proposal made by the learned Advocate
General, Assam on an earlier date, which is to the effect that all the applications
for compassionate appointment, in relation to the cases which are pending in
this Court, challenging the impugned O.M dated 18.09.2024 shall be considered
by the concerned authorities on merit. The same would be done by taking into
account the various guidelines for compassionate appointment prior to
01.04.2017 that were applicable in the State of Assam and the various decisions
passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the High Court. Accordingly, the said
Page No.# 5/6
bunch of writ petitions was disposed of in terms of the direction passed in
paragraph no. 9 of the said judgment which is being abstracted as below:-
"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
Page No.# 6/6
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."
[5.] Considering the above submission, the present writ petition appears to
be squarely covered as well and accordingly, the same is being disposed of in
terms of paragraph no. 9 of the Order dated 03.04.2025, which is abstracted
herein above.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
