Page No.# 1/14 GAHC010157512025 2025:GAU-AS:13255 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4046/2025 KHORSING TIMUNG W/O LATE SARMEN TIMUNG R/AONGKANGTUL, DIPHU, P.O. DIPHU, DIST. KARBI ANGLONG, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 8 ORS. REP BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06. 2:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM COOPERATION DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 06. 3:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06. 4:THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE (SLC) REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-06. 5:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY Page No.# 2/14 KARBI ANGLONG AUTONOMOUS COUNCIL (KAAC) DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM PIN- 782460. 6:THE ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM 7:THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETGIES DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM. 8:THE DISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES DIPHU KARBI ANGLONG ASSAM. 9:THE TREASURY OFFICER DIPHU KARBIANGLONG DIPHU ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J I BORBHUIYA, A B T HAQUE,MR A HOSSAIN,W.H. DEVI,MR. L MOHAN,MRS. K H CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, CO OP,SC, FINANCE,SC, K A A C BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA ORDER Date : 24.09.2025 Heard Mr. J.I. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Page No.# 3/14 Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent nos.1 and 4; Mr. R. Borpujari, learned standing counsel for the Finance Department, respondent no.3 and 9; Mr. J. Chutia, learned standing counsel for the KAAC, respondent nos.5 to 8; and Ms. M.D. Borah, learned standing counsel for the Cooperation Department, respondent no.2. 2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari to set aside the minutes of the meeting dated 02.03.2023 passed by the State Level Committee (SLC for short); for setting aside the OM No. ABP.104/2024/90 dated 18.09.2024, issued by the Government of Assam, Personnel (B) Department; for issuance of direction to the respondent authorities, including the SLC to approve the appointment and recommendation of the DLC, Karbi Anglong for appointment of petitioner on compassionate ground; and for directing the respondent authorities to release the salary of the petitioner, including arrears of salary. 3. In brief, the case of the petitioner is that his father, while serving as the Senior Inspector/Auditor in the office of the Additional Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Karbi Anglong, Diphu, died-in-harness on 05.12.2007. The petitioner projects that the application for appointment on compassionate ground was submitted on 20.12.2007, followed by another application on 28.04.2010. 4. It is projected that by the minutes of the District Level Committee (DLC for short) held on 29.01.2014, the name of the petitioner was Page No.# 4/14 recommended for appointment on compassionate ground. It is also projected that by a letter dated 03.01.2020, issued by the Secretary, Department of Cooperation, Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council, the approval was granted for appointment of the petitioner in the vacant sanctioned post of LDA on compassionate ground. Accordingly, vide order dated 25.01.2021, issued by the District Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Karbi Anglong, the petitioner was appointed to the post of LDA on compassionate ground in the office of the Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Diphu, Karbi Anglong and the petitioner projects that he gave a joining report on 29.01.2021. 5. It is further projected that in the meanwhile, the petitioner received his salary from February to July 2021.Thereafter, on a query raised by the Hills Area Department, Govt. of Assam, the Deputy Secretary to the Department of Personnel-B, Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council had informed the said authority that the Autonomous Council in the 6thScheduled areas is empowered to appoint Grade III and Grade IV posts, the matter relating to the appointment of the petitioner was not referred to the SLC. 6. Thereupon, a proposal for approval of the appointment of the petitioner was sent to the Cooperation Department of Assam by letter dated 20.12.2022 by the Department of Personnel-B, Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council. However, the SLC, in its minutes of the meeting held on 02.03.2023, had rejected the proposal for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground, inter alia, on the grounds that the date of the application was 23.05.2013, which is 5 (five) years after the death of the petitioner's father and accordingly, the SLC did not recommend the name of the petitioner in light of Page No.# 5/14 the OM No. ABP 50/2006/Pt/182 dated 01.06.2015. 7. The Department of Personnel-B, Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council, re-submitted a proposal to the Cooperation Department for approval of the State Level Committee. As nothing has been done so far, the present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 8. In support of his submissions towards entitlement of the petitioner to appointment on compassionate ground, the learned counsel for the petitioner has produced a copy of the order dated 22.03.2012, passed by this court in WP(C) 2451/2011 to project that in respect of the Bodoland Territorial Council(BTC for short), it has been held that 6thScheduled areas are not required to route their appointment on compassionate ground through the SLC and the DLC of the BTC was held to have jurisdiction to have its own DLC for considering appointments on compassionate grounds. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner also places reliance on the order dated 22.09.2023, passed by this court in WP(C) 5534/2023, to project that the petitioner therein was directed to be paid her salary if it is found that the petitioner worked in the office of the Assistant/Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Karbi Anglong, Diphu, as the said petitioner was appointed on compassionate grounds. 10. Opposing the prayer made in the petition, the learned standing counsel for the Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council has submitted that appointments under the Cooperation Department in the office of the Additional Registrar of Cooperative Societies and authorities thereunder is a transferred subject where Page No.# 6/14 the KAAC will have to follow the State rules, which includes SLC as well as the DLC. It is also submitted that in respect of non-transferred subjects, the first salary is to be released by obtaining Finance (SIU) approval from the Finance Department of the Government of Assam. 11. The said submissions are also reiterated by the learned standing counsel for the Finance Department as well as the learned standing counsel for the Cooperation Department by further submitting that the ratio laid down in the case of Achyut Ranjan Das vs. Assam, (2006) 4 GLT 674, read with the decision of this Court in the case of Fajiron Nessa (2010) 4 GLT 348, as the application was found to be beyond the prescribed period of limitation, the said proposal was rightly rejected by the SLC. 12. Examined the materials available on record. Considered the submissions and the cases cited at the Bar. 13. At the outset, it may be state that in the writ petition, the petitioner has projected that he had applied for appointment on compassionate ground on 20.12.2007. If that be so, then the application for appointment on compassionate ground is deemed to have lapsed by efflux of time on 19.12.2009. Be it stated that the application of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground has been forwarded by the Additional Registrar of Co- operative Societies (Hills), Diphu vide letter dated 17.11.2009 (Annexure-5). In this regard, it would be appropriate to reproduce hereinbelow paragraph 7 of the case of Achyut Ranjan Das & Ors. v. State of Assam & Ors. 2006 (4) GLT 674: (2006) 0 Supreme(Gau) 712 [extracted from (2006) 0 Supreme(Gau) 712]: Page No.# 7/14 “7. Having understood the principles governing compassionate appointment as deducible from the pronouncements of the Apex Court and in the light of what has been discussed above, this Court is of the view that it will only be just and appropriate to lay down the under noted principles on the basis of which, henceforth, claims relating to compassionate appointment will have to be considered: I. All pending applications against existing and available vacancies as per the quota earmarked including the cases of the Petitioners in the present cases and all others, who may not be before the Court, shall be decided in accordance with the proposed directions to be laid down in the present order and also in accordance with the principles noted in the preceding paragraphs of this order. This will be done within a period of 4 (four) months from today. The present direction naturally has to be considered as a one-time measure in view of the subsequent direction as laid down in the succeeding paragraphs. II. The District Head of each Department will intimate the vacancies as and when such vacancies occur, to the Court Appointed District Level Committees for its scrutiny. There will be no delay in such intimation. III. The District Level Committee will be constituted by the Deputy Commissioner of the District and the Superintendent of Police. The Deputy Commissioner himself will sit in the Committee. The District Head(s) of such departments in which vacancies are available shall be co-opted as the Additional Members of the Committee. IV. The District Level Committee will meet once every 2 (two) months on the last Saturday of the second month. V. The District Level Committee will decide as to who amongst the eligible candidates is entitled to compassionate appointment. To the extent possible such appointments will be recommended to be made within the District. In making the recommendations for appointments, the District Level Committee will take into account the financial condition of the family of the deceased and on a relative consideration of the cases will make its recommendation. There will be no selection and "seniority of the claim" will not be resorted to unless two or more eligible candidates are at par. VI. To decide on the question of financial status of the family of a claimant regard will be had to the following factors as laid down in G.M. v. Kunti Tiwari (supra) Page No.# 8/14 (a) Gratuity amount received/receivable. (b) Family pension payable. (c) Provident Fund Amount received/receivable. (d) Any ex-gratia payment made or payable. (e) Proceeds of LIC Policy and other investments of the deceased. (f) Income of the family from other sources. (g) Employment of other family members. (h) Size of the family and liabilities, if any. VII. The recommendations of the District Level Committee will be considered by a State Level Committee consisting of the Chief Secretary and the Senior Financial Commissioner of the State. The Commissioner and Secretary of the Department(s) in which vacancies are available will be co-opted as Additional Members of the State Level Committee. VIII. The State Level Committee will meet once every 3 (three) months. IX. All vacancies available against the quota of compassionate appointment must be filled up within a period of 6 (six) months from the date of occurrence of the vacancy in accordance with the present directions. X. If the applications of eligible candidates remain pending and cannot be considered due to want of vacancies for a period of 2 (two) years from the date of making such applications, all such applications will require no further consideration and must be understood to have spent their force. 14. The contents of the purported application dated 20.12.2007, ex facie does not appear to be correct because the date of birth of the petitioner is mentioned as 13.11.1982 in column no. 2(c) of the application form, but in column no. 5(3) of the said form, the petitioner has disclosed his age to be 27 years. Therefore, either the application form was submitted in the year 2009, or Page No.# 9/14 the contents of either column no. 2(c) or column no. 5(3) is incorrect. 15. Moreover, as per the contents of the recommendation made in the last paragraph of Part-II of the said form, the District Deputy Registrar Co-operative Societies, Karbi Anglong, Diphu has stated that the applicant (i.e. the petitioner) has submitted his application earlier also, which was forwarded to the KAAC Authority. The said endorsement also confirms that the purported application annexed as Annexure-2 of the writ petition cannot be the same application that the petitioner claims to have submitted on 20.12.2007, because the petitioner projects that his father had died-in-harness on 05.12.2007. 16. The petitioner has annexed incomplete copy of the minutes of District Level Committee (DLC for short) held on 29.01.2014, wherein there is reference to the name of the petitioner at serial no. 14, without there being any disclosure as to how many applicants were there and what documents were considered. The documents that were considered are very relevant because in this writ petition the petitioner has annexed a copy of the annual income certificate that was issued on 07.11.2013 by the Assistant Revenue Officer, Diphu Circle, KAAC, disclosing annual income for the year 2013 to be Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only). This is of immense significance because, the State Level Committee (SLC for short) of Co-operation Department, by the minutes of its meeting held on 02.03.2023, had rejected the proposal of the KAAC, Diphu for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground, amongst others, on the ground that the date of his application was 23.05.2013, which is after 5 (five) years of his father’s death. Page No.# 10/14 17. By referring to the documents annexed to the writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted that communication no. KAAC/Esstt- 328/Co-op/P(B)/2011-12/25 dated 03.01.2020, the Secretary, Department of Co-operation, KAAC, Diphu had informed the Additional Registrar of Cooperative Societies (Hills), Diphu regarding approval of the name of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground as LDA against vacant sanctioned post. Accordingly, by an order under memo no. DRE.13/Pt/86-2017/84 dated 25.01.2021, the District Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Karbi Anglong, had appointed the petitioner as LDA on compassionate ground in the Office of the Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Karbi Anglong, Diphu. Thereupon, the petitioner had submitted his joining report on 29.01.2021 (forenoon). Thereafter, the respondent authorities got the police verification report regarding the antecedents of the petitioner. It was also submitted that vide letter dated 08.03.2022, in response to the query from Senior F.A., Hills Area Department, the Deputy Secretary, Department of Personnel-B, KAAC, Diphu, had clarified that in 6th Schedule Areas, the KAAC is empowered to appoint Grade-III and Grade-IV employees and therefore, the matter was not referred to SLC. 18. In the opinion of the Court, if the matter relating to appointment of the petitioner was not required to be referred to the SLC, the KAAC authorities ought not to have referred the matter to the SLC in the first place by the Deputy Secretary, Department of Personnel-B, KAAC, Diphu, vide letter under memo no. KAAC/Esstt/P(B)/ F.Salary/ Query/ 2022-23/71 dated 20.12.2022. Consequently, there was no necessity of want of approval of the Finance (SIU) Department, Page No.# 11/14 Govt. of Assam, as the salary of the petitioner would have been paid out of the funds of the KAAC, not dependent on budgetary allocation of the State Government. However, that is not the case in hand. The learned Standing Counsel for the KAAC, on a pointed query of the Court, had made a categorical statement that the Cooperation Department is a “Transferred Subject”, but the guidelines of the Govt. of Assam regarding appointment in Cooperation Department under KAAC had to be scrupulously followed. 19. The said submission of the learned standing counsel for the KAAC is adopted by the learned Standing Counsel for the Cooperation Department and also by the learned Standing Counsel for the Finance Department of the State. 20. The judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Bodoland Territorial Council (supra), cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner is under facts and circumstances peculiar to the said case. In that case, the Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC for short) was the petitioner and it had prayed before the Court that the BTC be allowed to constitute its own DLC in BTAD area, which was allowed, keeping in mind the spirit of the 6th Schedule of the Constitution of India. In the present case, the KAAC does not have any grievance regarding constitution of DLC. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show that the said judgment is an authority on the point that DLC recommendations need not be sent for a consideration by the SLC and the DLC recommendations are final and binding on KAAC. At least the learned Standing Counsel for the KAAC, Cooperation Department and Finance Department do not make such admission that no SLC decision was required before appointing the petitioner as LDA in Cooperation Department under KAAC. Page No.# 12/14 21. Moreover, if according to the petitioner, no SLC recommendation was necessary and DLC recommendation was final for KAAC, there was no requirement for the petitioner to make prayer no. (iii), inter alia, praying for a direction upon the SLC to approve the appointment and recommendation of the DLC. By making such a prayer, the petitioner is deemed to have acknowledged that SLC recommendation was necessary for appointing the petitioner as LDA in the Office of the Assistant Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Karbi Anglong, Diphu. 22. Be that as it may, by now, vide OM No. FEG.28/2017/26 dated 14.09.2017, the State Government has introduced a new scheme in lieu of appointment on compassionate ground, applicable for persons whose predecessor-in-interest had died on or after 31.03.2017. The consequent O.M. under memo no. ABP.104/2024/90 dated 18.09.2024, is seen to have also been circulated to the Principal Secretary, KAAC, Diphu, by which it has been clarified that no administrative department shall entertain any application for appointment on compassionate ground in respected of cases where the Govt. employee had died prior to 31.03.2017. 23. Thus, at this stage, it would also be appropriate to quote the relevant paragraph 7.5 of the case of State of West Bengal v. Debabrata Tiwari & Ors., (2023) 0 Supreme(SC) 191, which is quoted below:- “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, Page No.# 13/14 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.” 24. Therefore, if the contention of the petitioner is accepted, it would mean that the KAAC would have the authority to appointment the petitioner in Grade- III and/or Grade-IV on compassionate ground vide order dated 25.01.2021, i.e. after about 13 (thirteen) years of the death of his father on 05.12.2007. Such appointment order is found to be contrary to the law laid down by this Court in the case of Achyut Ranjan Das (supra) and Debabrata Tiwari (supra) and therefore, not enforceable through this Court. 25. The petitioner has also not been able to demonstrate from any Act, Rules or Notification issued by the KAAC, thereby dispensing with the requirement of approval from SLC before making appointment on compassionate ground. 26. Moreover, the petitioner has failed to show that the KAAC could have made appointment of the petitioner without prior sanction and/or approval from the Finance (SIU) Department and thereby to burden the State Exchequer with financial liability in respect of the petitioner. Page No.# 14/14 27. In light of the discussions above, the Court is inclined to hold that the petitioner has not been able to make out any case for the Court to (i) set aside the minutes of the meeting of the State Level Committee (SLC for short) held on 02.03.2023; (ii) for setting aside the O.M. under memo no. ABP.104/2024/90 dated 18.09.2024, issued by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Personnel Department; (iii) to direct the SLC to approve the appointment and recommendation of the DLC, KAAC in respect of the case of the petitioner; and (iv) to direct the respondents to release the salary of the petitioner. 28. Therefore, this writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. However, subject to the law of limitation, the dismissal of this writ petition would not preclude the right of the petitioner to recover his dues, if any, from the KAAC or authorities under it for service rendered, in such manner as the petitioner may be so advised, however, without financial liability whatsoever against (i) the Govt. of Assam, Cooperation Department; (ii) Govt. of Assam, Hills Area Department; and (iii) Govt. of Assam, Finance Department. JUDGE Comparing Assistant