Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010066082025 2025:GAU-AS:4225 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1794/2025 NAJRANA KHANAM LASKAR S/O- LATE SAMIR UDDIN LASKAR, VILL- VICHINGCHA PART II, PO- AND PS- HAILAKANDI, DIST-0 HAILAKANDI, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE SECY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, DEPTT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 06 2:THE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION KAHILIPARA GUWAHATI-19 3:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE FOR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CASE FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND HAILAKANDI REP. BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HAILAKANDI ASSAM PIN-788151 4:THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER HAILAKANDI ASSAM PIN-788151 5:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS HAILAKANDI ASSAM PIN-78815 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. H A LASKAR, A. H. AHMED,MS D DUTTA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU, GA, ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA ORDER Date : 07.04.2025 Heard Mr. H. A. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. G. Pegu, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 as well as Mr. S. Das, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2. 2. The petitioner’s counsel submits that the case pertains to the petitioner’s application for compassionate appointment not being considered by the State respondents, due to the O.M dated 18.09.2024. He submits that the present case is covered by the decision and directions in the order dated 03.04.2025 passed in a batch of writ petitions, the lead case being WP(C) 342/2025. He accordingly submits that the present matter may be disposed of, in line with the order dated 03.04.2025 passed WP(C) 342/2025. 3. The counsels for the respondents submit that they have got no objection to the prayer made by the petitioner’s counsel. 4. Paragraph 9 & 10 of the order dated 03.04.2025 passed in WP(C) 342/2025 states as follows: “9. In view of the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, all the writ petitions that are pending as on today, i.e., 03.04.2025, in the Gauhati High Court, which have put to challenge the impugned OM dated 18.09.2024, are to be decided as follows:- (i) All the applications for compassionate appointment submitted by the petitioners shall be considered and disposed of by the concerned DLC/SLC on merit, by taking into consideration the various guidelines prior to 01.04.2017, laid down by the State Government for compassionate appointment and the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the High Court. Consequently, the Page No.# 3/3 rejection of all compassionate appointments by the DLC/SLC, which have been put to challenge and are pending in the Gauhati High Court as on 03.04.2025, are set aside. (ii) The entire process for considering the various applications for compassionate appointment and the decision to be taken in each case by the concerned authorities, should be completed within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order by the concerned District Commissioner, who is also the Chairman of the DLC, if the matter pertains to the DLC. In other cases, the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam, who is the Chairman of the SLC, if the matter pertains the SLC. 10. It is made clear that in view of the consent of the parties, this Court has not gone into the merits of any of the petitioners’ cases that are being disposed of by way of this order and as such, the applications for compassionate appointment should be disposed of by the concerned authorities on merit, as they deem it fit and proper. The decision/s to be taken by the concerned authorities should be based on reasons and the decision taken should be communicated to the petitioners thereafter. It is also directed that while deciding the applications for compassionate appointment, the respondents cannot take recourse to the impugned OM dated 18.09.2024, though the judgment provided therein, i.e., the case of State of West Bengal vs. Debabrata Tiwari and others, (Civil Appeal No. 8842-8855/2020) can be considered/applied by the concerned authorities. It is again made clear that this order cannot be used as a precedent for cases that are filed on 04.04.2025 and thereafter. It shall only apply to cases that are pending before this Court as on 03.04.2025.” 5. On considering that the present case is covered by the order dated 03.04.2025 passed WP(C) 342/2025, this Court disposes of the present case, in terms of the directions and observations made in the order dated 03.04.2025 passed WP(C) 342/2025. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant