Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010207612025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5389/2025 SADIA BEGUM LASKAR D/O LATE MOINUL HAQUE LASKAR RESIDENT OF BASHDAHAR PART I, PO MATIJURI, DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 788163 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS REP BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 3:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION DISPUR GUWAHATI 06 4:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER (DEEO) HAILAKANDI ASSAM 788151 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CUM CHAIRMAN DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE (DLC) HAILAKANDI FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND HAILAKANDI ASSAM 78815 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N HOSSAIN, Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, ELEM. EDU Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 15.09 .2025 Heard Mr. N. Hossain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. D.D. Barman, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 5 and Mr. G. Pegu, learned standing counsel, Elementary Education Department, appearing for the respondent Nos.3 and 4. 2. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the O.M. dated 18.09.2024, issued by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Personnel (B) Department and also issue direction to the respondent authorities, more particularly, the District Level Committee (DLC) to reconsider the proposal of the petitioner as per earlier order of this Court dated 06.10.2023 and also to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to submit the required documents/information to the notice dated 30.08.2025. 3. The undisputed facts, as projected in this petition and also the submission by the learned counsel for both the parties, are adumbrated herein below:- Late Moinul Haque Laskar, the father of the petitioner, was serving as Headmaster of Nityanandapur M.V. School, under District Elementary Education Officer, Hailakandi, who died in harness on 10.07.2016 i.e. before issuance of Office Memorandum dated 01.04.2017. The petitioner, being the daughter of the deceased employee, had applied for appointment under compassionate ground on 16.02.2017, to the District Elementary Education Officer, Hailakandi as per prevailing norms. But, the authority has not considered the application of the petitioner. Thereafter, the District Elementary Education Officer, Hailakandi had placed the application of the petitioner before the District Level Committee (DLC) meeting, held on 05.10.2021. But, the same was rejected on the ground of the Page No.# 3/4 petitioner being under-qualified. The petitioner then approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.5909/2023, challenging the minutes of the DLC dated 05.10.2021. The said petition was disposed of by an order dated 06.10.2023, by setting aside the minutes of the DLC dated 05.10.2021, in respect of the claim of the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner has submitted a certified copy of the order of this Court dated 06.10.2023, along with one representation before the District Commissioner, Hailakandi. Thereafter, the District Elementary Education Officer, Hailakandi, vide letter dated 21.09.2024, requested the petitioner to appear before the District Commissioner, vide letter dated 23.09.2024 without fail. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed a contempt case in this Court, being Cont.Cas(C) No.681/2024 and in the said case, notice was issued to the respondent. Thereafter, the meeting of the DLC, Hailakandi, has not taken up the proposal of the petitioner for consideration as per norms and while the matter was pending, the Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Personnel (B) Department has issued the O.M. dated 18.09.2024. But, before the said office memorandum, being issued by the Personnel (B) Department, this Court has directed the DLC, Hailakandi for fresh consideration of the case of the petitioner. Under such circumstances, it is contended to direct the respondent authorities to place the matter before the DLC for fresh consideration. 4. Perusal of the minutes of the meeting of the DLC dated 05.10.2021, (Annexure-1) reveals that the case of the petitioner was not considered by the DLC on account of not possessing the requisite qualification by the petitioner at the time of submission of application and the said recommendation was set aside by this Court in WP(C) No.5909/2023. But, before the matter being considered by the DLC again, the respondent authorities has issued the O.M. dated 18.09.2024. 5. A perusal of the order dated 06.10.2023 passed by this Court in WP(C) No.5909/2023, indicates that setting aside the minutes of the meeting of the DLC, Hailakandi, dated 05.10.2021, it was directed to place the matter again before the DLC for a fresh consideration of the claim of the petitioner as per law. Page No.# 4/4 6. Since the earlier minutes of the meeting of the DLC was set aside in the order dated 06.10.2023 by directing the respondent authorities to place the matter before the DLC again for a fresh consideration, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition by directing the respondent authorities to place the case of the petitioner, before the next DLC, for a fresh consideration and the aforementioned exercise has to be carried out by the respondent authorities within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7. The petitioner shall obtain a certified copy of this order and shall place the same before the respondent authorities within a period of one week from today. Comparing Assistant Sd/- Robin Phukan JUDGE