Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam And Othrs
2025 Latest Caselaw 4968 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam And Othrs on 26 May, 2025

                                                                   Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010108542025




                                                             2025:GAU-AS:6646

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

                          Case No. : WP(C)/2815/2025

         SHAMIMA FIRDAUS MAZUMDER
         D/O- LATE NAZIM UDDIN MAZUMDER ,
         VILLAGE- UJANKUPA PART -I, P.O- UJANKUPA, P.S ANDDIST-
         HAILAKANDI, ASSAM



         VERSUS


         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND OTHRS
         REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM,
         DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION ,
         DISPUR, GHY-6.

         2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY
         TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
         PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT
          DISPUR
          GHY-6.

         3:THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE
          REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
          DISPUR
          GHY-6.

         4:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE
          HAILAKANDI
          REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN/DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
          HAILAKANDI ASSAM

         5:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
         TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM
          DISPUR
                                                                           Page No.# 2/5

             GUWAHATI-06

            6:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION
            ASSAM
             GUWAHATI-19
             KAHILIPAR

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MS A BEGUM, S. M. ZINNA,MS S R MAZARBHUIYA,MR. A M
BARBHUIYA

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, ELEM. EDU,SC, FINANCE




                                   BEFORE
                  HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LANUSUNGKUM JAMIR

                                         ORDER

Date : 26.05.2025

1. Heard Mr. A.M. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S. Chutia, learned standing counsel, Elementary Education Department, for the respondent Nos. 1 & 6; Ms. D.D. Barman, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4; and Ms. R.M. Baruah, learned standing counsel, Finance Department, for the respondent No. 5.

2. The father of the petitioner Late Nazim Uddin Mazumder, while serving as an Assistant Teacher in Premlochan Higher Secondary School, Hailakandi, died in harness on 20.07.2015. The petitioner thereafter made an application praying for appointment on compassionate grounds on 11.04.2016. However, as the case of the petitioner was not placed before the concerned DLC, the petitioner approached this Court by filing WP(C) No. 5683/2021, which was disposed of on 29.10.2021 with the following directions:

"4. In the circumstance, this writ petition stands disposed of directing the DEEO Page No.# 3/5

Hailakandi to place the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment made on 11.04.2016 before the next meeting of the DLC of Hailakandi district. The DLC of Hailakandi district shall consider the application of the petitioner on its own merit and not to reject the same on technical grounds.

5. It is also made clear that the claim of the petitioner be considered against any vacant post for which the petitioner may be duly qualified for and as provided in the OM dated 01.06.2015, the same may be considered against any post that may be available in any other department even other than the Education Department."

3. Thereafter, the District Level Committee, Hailakandi, in its meeting held on 19.09.2023, considered the case of the petitioner and recommended her case for appointment as an Assistant Teacher in Middle Schools on compassionate grounds subject to verification of income and unemployed certificate from the Circle Officer and verification of the documents with the original ones.

4. In the meantime, the Personnel (B) Department, Government of Assam, issued an Office Memorandum on 18.09.2024, wherein it is stated that no cases for appointment on compassionate ground to the family member of State Government employees who died-in-harness or retired prematurely on being declared permanently incapacitated for service or missing and whose whereabouts is not known prior to 31.03.2017, shall be entertained by any Administrative Department/Authority for any reason whatsoever nor be placed before the SLCs/DLCs for recommendation of candidates for appointment on compassionate ground.

5. The said Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024, was challenged in a number of writ petitions and the leading case was WP(C) No. 342 of 2025. This batch of writ petitions were disposed of by an Order dated 03.04.2025, wherein, the operative portion reads as under:

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), 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.

Page No.# 5/5

11. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of."

6. Ms. D.D. Barman, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, submits that as the case of the petitioner has already been recommended by the District Level Committee, Hailakandi in its meeting held on 19.09.2023 and also in view of the Order dated 03.04.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 342/2025 and in a batch of other writ petitions, the case of the petitioner can now be considered by the State Level Committee in its next immediate sitting.

7. Accordingly, recording the submissions made by the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, this writ petition is disposed of directing the State Level Committee to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of the recommendation made by the District Level Committee, Hailakandi on 19.09.2023 and in accordance with law, in its next immediate sitting. However, if the case of the petitioner has already been considered by the State Level Committee, the outcome of such consideration shall also be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

8. With the above observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant