Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010003802022 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/309/2022 HEERA THAPA S/O LATE BABULAL THAPA, R/O AILDURA, HAFLONG TOWN, P.O. AND P.S.-HAFLONG, DIST- DIMA HASAO, ASSAM, PIN-788819 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, PWD (ROAD), DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006 2:THE CHIEF ENGINEER PWD (ROAD) ASSAM CHANDMARI GUWAHATI-781003 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER PWD HAFLONG NEC CIRCLE HAFLONG PIN-788819 DIMA HASAO 4:THE STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASIONATE GROUNDS REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-78100 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S KANUNGOE, MS. J CHETTRY Advocate for the Respondent : SC, PWD ROAD, GA, ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 28.05.2025 None appears for the petitioner as well as for the respondents No.1, 2 and 3. However, Ms. A. Talukdar, learned State Counsel appears for the respondent No.4. 2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the minutes of the meeting dated 31.12.2018 of the State Level Committee rejecting the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground. 3. The petitioner claims that his father late Babulal Thapa while serving as Stenographer Grade-III in the Office of Superintendent Engineer PWD, Haflong NEC Circle, Haflong, died-in-harness on 07.03.2014. The petitioner being the eldest son, on 10.06.2014 applied for appointment on compassionate ground. Accordingly, the District Level Committee in its meeting held on 13.11.2011, recommended his name for appointment on compassionate ground. However, the case was not placed before the State Level Committee. 4. Being aggrieved for non-placement of his case, he has filed writ petition being WP(C) 1581/2017, and the same was disposed of on 07.04.2017 by this Court directing to place the petitioner’s claim for compassionate appointment before the next State Level Committee. Thereafter, the State Level Committee has considered all the cases for appointment of compassionate ground. 5. By the impugned minutes dated 31.12.2018, the case of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that it does not fall within the 5% quota as recommended by the District Level Committee. 6. The respondent No.4 has filed an affidavit which reflects that the case of the petitioner was considered by the impugned minutes dated 31.12.2018 and rejected on the ground that Page No.# 3/3 his case does not come under 5% quota for appointment on compassionate ground as recommended by the District Level Committee. Again the case of the petitioner was considered for the second time by the minutes dated 15.02.2022 for consideration of his appointment on compassionate ground in Grade-IV post. However, the petitioner found to be under qualified, therefore, his case has been rejected. 7. Having considered the grounds of rejection, firstly on not falling under the 5% quota for appointment on compassioned ground and secondly, the rejection on the ground of under qualification, this Court is of prima facie view that there is no consistency in the consideration by the State Level Committee. However, since there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the petitioner may not be interested to pursue this matter. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution. JUDGE Comparing Assistant