Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010122812025 2025:GAU-AS:16815 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3213/2025 MIZANUR RAHMAN MONDAL S/O LATE MOKBUL HUSSAIN, VILL- KHARUABANDHA, P.O.- FEKAMARI, P.S.- SOUTH SALMARA, DIST- SOUTH SALMARA, MANKACHAR, ASSAM, PIN-783135 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006 2:THE CHAIRMAN OF STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE (SLC) FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 3:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 4:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 5:THE INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS SDC SOUTH SALMARA P.O. AND DIST- SOUTH SALMARA ASSAM PIN-783131 Page No.# 2/4 6:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CUM CHAIRMAN OF DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE (DLC) SOUTH SALMARA FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND P.O. AND DIST- SOUTH SALMARA ASSAM PIN-78313 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N HOSSAIN, Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, SEC. EDU. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 05-12-2025 Heard Mr. N. Hossain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S. Konwar, learned Government Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 6 and Ms. D. Musahary, learned Standing Counsel for the Secondary Education. 2. The petitioner, by filing this writ petition, has challenged the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024, passed by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Personnel (B) Department, whereby, the Government’s policy/scheme of providing appointment to a family member of a Government servant on compassionate grounds has been done away with, in complete suppression of the earlier OMs, notifications and policy/scheme relating to compassionate appointments. 3. The father of the petitioner had died in harness on 13.11.2006, while he was serving as a Grade-IV employee of Janata Higher Secondary School, Kharuabandha, under the then Inspector of Schools, DDC, Dhubri Page No.# 3/4 (now SDC, South Salmara in the District of South Salmara), Assam. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that, having faced extreme financial hardship following the death of his father, he submitted an application under the Government’s policy/scheme for appointment on compassionate grounds. After long lapse of time, the District Level Committee (DLC), vide its Minutes of Meeting dated 03.09.2024, recommended the petitioner, along with three others, for appointment as Assistant Teacher in a Lower Primary School. However, in the meantime, the impugned Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 was issued, curtailing the right of the petitioner to be considered by the State Level Committee (SLC). Therefore, the petitioner seeks interference of the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 and to direct the SLC to consider the case of the petitioner, in accordance with the recommendation of the DLC. 5. It is stated at the Bar that, in a similarly situated matter, this Court had directed that the cases of petitioners whose applications for appointment on compassionate grounds were pending should be considered. Pursuant to such direction, the Department has issued a notice seeking applications and relevant documents from the persons whose cases are still pending. 6. Mr. Hossain, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that, in terms of the notice seeking applications and documents, the petitioner has already submitted his application for appointment on compassionate ground on 10.09.2025, during the pendency of this writ petition. 7. Having considered that the State respondents have issued a notice to submit the requisite applications/documents to persons seeking Page No.# 4/4 compassionate appointment prior to the issuance of the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 and that the petitioner has already submitted the application and required documents to the concerned authorities, I am of the view that no further adjudication is necessary in this proceedings. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed and disposed of. 8. It is needless to observe that, since the petitioner has submitted his application and the requisite documents as sought by the respondent authorities, the same shall be considered in accordance with law. JUDGE Comparing Assistant