Decided on July 16,2018

Bhaben Das Appellant
State Of Assam And 4 Ors Respondents


Nelson Sailo, J. - (1.) Heard Mr. AR Bhuyan, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. B Ahmed, the learned Standing Counsel, Irrigation Department appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Also heard Mr. MR Adhikari, the learned State Counsel who appears for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5.
(2.) The case of the writ petitioner briefly may be narrated at the outset. The father of the writ petitioner was working as Helper (Grade-IV) under the establishment of the respondent No.3. But unfortunately, he died in harness on 14.12.2014. On his death, the petitioner as his son applied for appointment on compassionate basis by submitting an application on 13.01.2015. His application for compassionate appointment was considered by the District Level Committee (DLC) in its meeting held on 25.02.2016 whereby, the petitioner was recommended for the Grade-IV post (Khalasi) against the single vacancy which occurred in the year 2013-2014. The petitioner in so far as his educational qualification is concerned is a matric pass. The recommendation of the DLC was thereafter, considered by the State Level Committee (SLC) which held its meeting on 13.12.2017. The SLC while considering the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment by referring to the Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015 (Annexure-6) came to the conclusion that since there was no vacancy meant for Scheduled Caste category as per the report of the respondent No.3, there was no scope for appointing him as Grade-IV Khalasi and accordingly, rejected his application. Aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court.
(3.) Mr. AR Bhuyan, the learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that the application of the petitioner is well within time and it was rightly accepted and recommendation was made for his appointment as Grade-IV Khalasi by the DLC. However, the SLC on the wrong premise considered the case of the writ petitioner and rejected his case for appointment on compassionate basis. The Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015 which was the basis on which the case of the petitioner was rejected provides for consideration of compassionate appointment of candidates in accordance with the recruitment roster in the appropriate category i.e. Scheduled Caste/ Scheduled Tribes/ OBC/ General. He submits that the Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015 being only prospective and therefore it has to be applied only from 01.06.2015. As for the writ petitioner, his father expired on 14.12.2014 and he submitted an application on 13.01.2015 and therefore, the Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015 will have no application to his case.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.