Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010268722025 2025:GAU-AS:16773 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6896/2025 HANIF MD IBRAHIM S/O- T. ABDUS SABUR MIAH RESIDENT OF VIIL- CHIRAKHOWA PO- JARUARCHAR, P. S- FAKIRGANJ DISTRICT- DHUBRI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006. 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM PERSONNEL DEPT. DISPUR GUWAHATI 781006 3:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPT. OF SCHOOL EDUCATION DISPUR GUWAHATI 06 4:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER (DEEO) DHUBRI ASSAM 783301 5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CUM CHAIRMAN DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE (DLC) DHUBRI FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND DHUBRI ASSAM 78330 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N HOSSAIN, MR N SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, ELEM. EDU Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 05.12.2025 Heard Mr. N. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. G. Pegu, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 5; and Mr. P.K. Borah, learned standing counsel for the Elementary Education Department, being respondent Nos. 3 & 4. 2. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuing direction to the respondent authorities to consider his case for being appointed on compassionate ground. 3. Mr. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the father of the petitioner, namely Late Abdus Sabur Miah, was serving as Arabic Teacher of Geramari ME School, under the District Elementary Education Officer, Dhubri (DEEO hereinafter), in the District of Dhubri and he died in harness on 16.09.2008, i.e. prior to 01.04.2017. Thereafter, the petitioner had applied for being appointed under compassionate ground on 27.02.2009, before the DEEO, as per the prevailing norms in the State and in the year 2005, the petitioner passed B.A. (Arts) examination. 3.1. Thereafter, the DEEO had placed the proposal of the petitioner before the District Level Committee (DLC hereinafter). But, the DLC, in its meeting held on 14.06.2010, had rejected the prayer of the petitioner. Being aggrieved, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing a writ petition, being W.P(C) No. 2532/2013, praying for setting aside the said minutes of the meeting of the DLC and vide order dated 07.04.2016, the said writ petition was disposed of by setting aside the minutes of the DLC meeting dated 14.06.2010 and also Page No.# 3/5 directed the petitioner to submit a fresh representation. 3.2. Thereafter, the DEEO had placed the proposal of the petitioner before the DLC and in its meeting held on 22.09.2021, the same was rejected. Being aggrieved, the petitioner had again approached this Court by filing a writ petition, being W.P(C) No. 5918/2023, praying for setting aside the DLC minutes of the meeting dated 22.09.2021 and vide order dated 08.12.2023, the said writ petition was disposed of by setting aside the DLC minutes and remanded the matter back to the DLC for fresh consideration. 3.3. Mr. Sarma also submits that the petitioner had submitted a representation, along with the certified copy of the order of this Court, on 18.12.2023, before the then Deputy Commissioner, Dhubri (DC hereinafter). But, in the mean time, the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Personnel (B) Department had issued the Office Memorandum (OM hereinafter) dated 18.09.2024 and on 20.09.2025, the petitioner came to know from the recommended candidates of Dhubri district about the subsequent rejection of his claim by the DLC dated 22.05.2024, on the ground of not having the requisite percentage of marks in HSLC and HS for appointment to the applied post. But, the authority did not communicate the said rejection order to the petitioner. 3.4. Mr. Sarma further submits that the petitioner also came to know that the case of one Hanif Ali Mondal was also rejected in the same DLC meeting, due to not having requisite percentage of marks in B.A. But, subsequently, his proposal was recommended by the DLC by way of a corrigendum, dated 07.10.2025, issued by the DC, i.e. after issuance of OM dated 18.09.2025 and execution order dated 30.08.2025. Page No.# 4/5 3.5. Further submission of Mr. Sarma is that in view of the interlocutory application filed by the Government of Assam, this Court had granted the prayer for extension of time to comply with the judgment and order of this Court, dated 03.04.2025, passed in W.P.(C) No. 342/2025. 3.6. Under such circumstances, Mr. Sarma has contended that the DLC may be directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner by setting aside minutes of the meeting of the DLC, dated 22.05.2024, on the basis of subsequent representation dated 03.11.2025. 3.7. Mr. Sarma also submits that the petitioner had also submitted a representation dated 26.11.2025, before the Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Personnel Department, as per the notice dated 30.08.2025. 4. Per-contra, Mr. Pegu, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate submits that since the petitioner has filed one representation on 26.11.2025, before the Secretary to the Government of Assam in the Personnel Department for allowing him to submit all of his details and since the date of filing of application has been extended by the Government, till January, 2026, this writ petition may be disposed of by directing the respondent authorities to consider the representation filed by the petitioner on 26.11.2025. 5. At this stage, Mr. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no objection in the event of disposing of this petition by directing the respondent authorities to consider the representation filed by the petitioner on 26.11.2025. 6. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties, I have carefully gone through the petition as well as the documents placed on record and also perused the judgment and order dated 03.04.2025, passed by a Page No.# 5/5 Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 342/2025 and also the order of extension of time dated 16.10.2025, passed in I.A.(Civil) No. 3268/2025. 7. Accordingly, taking note of the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties; also considering the facts and circumstances on the record; and also as agreed upon, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition by directing the respondent authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner filed on 26.11.2025 and to place his case before the appropriate committee, pursuant to order of this Court dated 08.12.2023, in W.P.(C) No. 5918/2023. 8. The aforesaid exercise has to be carried out within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. 9. The petitioner shall obtain a certified copy of this order and place the same before the respondent authorities within a period of 1 (one) week from today. JUDGE Comparing Assistant