Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010204132025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5425/2025 DEBJYOTI DAS S/O- LATE BHASKAR CHANDRA DAS, VILL.- CHANDRAPUR PART-II, P.O. CHANDRAPUR, P.S. LALA, DIST. HAILAKANDI, ASSAM, PIN- 788163. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT (ELEMENTARY), DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06. 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONNEL (B) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06. 3:THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONNEL (B) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06. 4:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT ASSAM KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19. 5:THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE (SLC) FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-06. Page No.# 2/4 6:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CASE FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND HAILAKANDI REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HAILAKANDI DIST. HAILAKANDI ASSAM PIN- 788151. 7:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER HAILAKANDI DIST. HAILAKANDI ASSAM PIN- 788151 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. H A LASKAR, MS D DUTTA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, ELEM. EDU BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 17.09 .2025 Heard Mr. H.A. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Deuri, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent Nos.2, 3, 5 and 6 and Ms. S. Konwar, learned standing counsel, Education (Elementary) Department, appearing for the respondent Nos.1, 4 and 7. 2. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 and also prayed for issuing direction to the respondent authorities to place the matter of the petitioner before the State Level Committee (SLC) for further consideration, as his name has already been recommended by the District Level Committee (DLC), Hailakandi, vide its minutes dated 19.09.2023, whereby the petitioner was recommended for appointment to the post of Page No.# 3/4 Assistant Teacher of L.P. School against 101 nos. of vacancies of 5% quota, earmarked for compassionate appointment. 3. Mr. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the father of the petitioner, namely, Lt. Bhaskar Chandra Das was serving as Headmaster of Gharmura M.E. School under Katlicherra Education Block in the district of Hailakandi and he died in harness on 10.10.2012. The petitioner was minor at the time of death of his father and he was only 12 years old and thereafter, the petitioner had applied for compassionate appointment on 08.05.2013. The DLC, vide minutes of the meeting, dated 19.09.2023, had recommended the name of the petitioner for being appointed on compassionate ground to a post of Assistant Teacher in L.P. School. But, in the meantime, the Additional Secretary to the Government of Assam, Personnel (B) Department, has issued Office Memorandum No.ABP.104/2024/90, dated 18.09.2024, whereby it has been decided not to consider the case of the compassionate appointment to the family members of the State Government employees, who died in harness prior to 01.04.2017. Mr. Laskar further submits that the petitioner is entitled to be considered for compassionate appointment under the die in harness scheme, as notified by the Government, vide Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015 and under such circumstances, Mr. Laskar has contended to allow this petition by directing the respondent authorities to place the matter before the next SLC. 4. Having heard the submission of learned counsel for both the parties, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and it appears that the basic facts in this petition are not in dispute. The father of the petitioner died in harness on 10.10.2012, while he was serving as Headmaster of Gharmura M.E. School under Katlicherra Education Block. After the demise of his father, the petitioner had applied for being appointed on compassionate ground on 08.05.2013 and the DLC has recommended his name vide minutes of the meeting dated 19.09.2023. But, in view of the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024, the case of the petitioner was not placed before the SLC. Page No.# 4/4 5. Taking note of the submission of learned counsel for both the parties and also considering facts and circumstances on the record, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition by directing the respondent authorities to place the case of the petitioner before the next SLC for further consideration. 6. The aforementioned exercise has to be carried out within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The petitioner shall obtain a certified copy of this order and place the same before the respondent authorities within a period of one week from today. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE