Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010112342025 2025:GAU-AS:17163 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3121/2025 BISWAJIT DAS S/O LT RANJIT KUMAR DAS VILL RANGPUR PART III PO KATLICHERRA PS KATLICHERRA DIST HAILAKANDI PIN 788161 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REP BY COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEER DEPTT DISPUR GUWAHATI 6 2:THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEER DEPTT DISPUR GUWAHATI 6 3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEER DEPTT HENGRABARI GUWAHATI 6 4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER HAILAKANDI CUM CHARIMAN DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT DIST HAILAKANDI ASSAM 5:THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (PHE) HAILAKANDI DIVISION HAILAKANDI 6:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONNEL (B) DEPARTMENT DISPUR GHY-6 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR M J QUADIR, MR. A K HANNAN Page No.# 2/6 Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, P H E BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER 10/12/2025 Heard Mr. M J Quadir, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T C Chutia, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, appearing for the State respondent. 2. The petitioner in the present proceedings has prayed for a direction upon the respondent authorities to place his case before the jurisdictional District Level Committee for consideration of his claim for appointment on compassionate grounds. The petitioner has also assailed the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024, whereby, it was decided that there would be no further consideration for appointment on compassionate grounds before the jurisdictional District Level Committee and the State Level Committee. The father of the petitioner, Ranjit Kumar Das, while serving as a Senior Grade-IV employee in the establishment of the Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Hailakandi Division, had died-in-harness on 11.06.2016. The petitioner had proximate to the time of the death of his father, submitted an application before the respondent No. 5, along with all requisite particulars for consideration of his case for appointment on compassionate grounds. The case of the petitioner was placed for consideration before the jurisdictional District Level Committee and the said committee in its meeting held on 11.02.2022 as well as in its extended meeting held on 16.03.2022, although, found the applicant suitable for appointment against a Grade-IV post, there being no vacancy available for such appointment in the establishment of the respondent No. 5 as well as in other departments in the District, the case of the petitioner was kept pending. The said aspect of the matter was informed to the petitioner vide an order dated 13.05.2022 issued by the Chairman of the jurisdictional Page No.# 3/6 District Level Committee. The petitioner, as directed, again appeared before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Hailakandi on 22.06.2023 along with all relevant documents. The District Level Committee, Hailakandi in its meeting held on 19.09.2023 considered the cases of a number of applicants for appointment on compassionate grounds, including the applicants seeking such appointment in the Public Health Engineering Division, however, the case of the petitioner was not considered by the said jurisdictional District Level Committee, although, there was a prior decision for such consideration to be made in respect of the petitioner, herein. Being aggrieved, the petitioner had instituted a writ petition, being WP(C) No. 1442/2014 before this Court and this Court vide order dated 29.04.2024 disposed of the said writ petition, directing the respondent authorities to place the case of the petitioner before the next meeting of the jurisdictional District Level Committee. It is the case of the petitioner that after the passing of the order dated 29.04.2024, his case was not placed before the jurisdictional District Level Committee for consideration of his claim for appointment on compassionate grounds. At this stage, the respondent authorities vide issuance of an Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 proceeded to arrive at a decision to not entertain any claim for appointment on compassionate grounds, where the death of the employee had occasioned prior to 31.03.2017. The said Office Memorandum was put to challenge before this Court by similarly situated persons. The said writ petitions were considered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and vide judgment dated 03.04.2025 rendered in the case of Abdul Kadir Bokshi & Ors. Vs. State of Assam and Others, along with other analogous writ petitions, reported in 2025 (3) GLT 896, upon appreciating the concession granted in the matter by the State respondents, permitted the cases of the petitioners, therein, to be considered by the State Level Committee/District Level Committee, as the case may be, on its own merits inspite of the issuance of the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024. It is submitted that the petitioner’s case, being similarly placed would also be required to be remanded back to the District Level Committee for a fresh consideration. Page No.# 4/6 It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Abdul Kadir Bokshi (supra) would squarely apply to his case also and accordingly, a direction is called upon to be issued to the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds. It is in the above background, the petitioner has instituted the present writ petition. 3. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and also perused the materials available on record. 4. The facts, noticed hereinabove, would reveal that the case of the petitioner was duly considered by the jurisdictional District Level Committee in its meeting held on 11.02.2022 and in the extended meeting held on 16.03.2022 and on such consideration, there being no vacant post available, the claim of the applicant for appointment on compassionate grounds was kept pending. The said aspect of the matter was also informed to the petitioner vide order dated 13.05.2022 issued by the Chairman of the jurisdictional District Level Committee. 5. It is a settled position that in the event a claim for appointment on compassionate grounds cannot be entertained for a period of 2 (two) years for want of vacancies, the said claim would lose its force. Although, there is a direction passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 29.04.2024 in WP(C) No. 1442/2024 for placing of the claim of the petitioner before the jurisdictional District Level Committee, it is seen that the said directions were not implemented till the issuance of the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 doing away with the scheme for appointment on compassionate grounds. The father of the petitioner had passed away on 11.06.2016 and thereafter, it is seen that the case of the petitioner was duly considered, although, with some delay, by the jurisdictional District Level Committee in its meeting held on 11.02.2022 as well as in the extended meeting held on 16.03.2022 and no recommendation was made in favour of the petitioner only on the ground that there was no vacancy available for entertaining his case for appointment on compassionate ground in the establishment of the respondent No. 5 as well as in other departments in the district. The said consideration as extended to the petitioner in Page No.# 5/6 the year 2022, being a consideration under the provisions of the scheme and the case of the petitioner not being permissible to be recommended for appointment on compassionate grounds, only on the ground of non-availability of vacancy for such appointment, this Court finds that the consideration as required to be made in respect of the claim of the petitioner was duly extended to him. In the present case, it is seen that the petitioner and his family members have sustained for the last around 9 (nine) years without any one of them being extended with an appointment on compassionate grounds. In view of the above discussion and also considering the delay occasioning since the death of the father of the petitioner, which had occasioned on 11.06.2016, the immediacy required for consideration of the case of a claimant for appointment on compassionate ground in the case of the petitioner is found to have been lost. The claim of the petitioner, accordingly, has been rendered stale. [Refer decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of West Bengal Vs. Debabrata Tiwari and Ors., reported in (2023) SCC Online SC 219]. 6. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner has made a submission that in pursuance to the direction passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Abdul Kadir Bokshi (supra), the respondents have issued a notice dated 30.08.2025, inviting applications from persons for consideration of their cases for appointment on compassionate grounds. It is submitted that the petitioner is also entitled to apply in pursuance to the said Notification. 7. The said position having come to the notice of this Court, this Court observes that in the event the petitioner has submitted his application in pursuance to the notice dated 30.08.2025, the conclusions drawn by this Court, hereinabove, shall not be bar the consideration of the case of the petitioner in terms of the said notice dated 30.08.2025. However, such consideration shall be made strictly appreciating the decision of the District Level Committee already arrived at in the matter in respect of the petitioner and also by reckoning the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Debabrata Tiwari (supra). Page No.# 6/6 8. With the above observation and direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant