Page No.# 1/8 GAHC020007042024 2026:GAU-NL:311 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : WP(C)/264/2024 SMTI KEZEVINUO D/O LATE VEYIE RESIDENT OF NAGA HOSPITAL COLONY NORTH PS KOHIMA, NAGALAND-797004 VERSUS THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY NAGALAND KOHIMA 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE NAGALAND KOHIMA 3:THE PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE NAGALAND KOHIM Advocate for the Petitioner : S. TEMJEN, TOSHITEMJEN PONGENER,ALIVI K CHOPHY,TEMSU JAMIR Advocate for the Respondent : GOVT ADV NL, Page No.# 2/8 BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH Advocates: For the Petitioner : Temsu Jamir For the State respondents : M. Longkumer, Govt. Adv. NL (R-1, 2 & 3) Date on which Judgment was reserved : NA Date of pronouncement of Judgment : 29.05.2026 Whether the pronouncement is of the : NA operative part of the Judgment? Whether the full Judgment has been : Yes pronounced? J U D G M E N T & O R D E R (O R A L) Heard Ms. Temsu Jamir, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Mr. Mosemsa Longkumer, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of R-1, 2 & 3. 2. The petitioner herein has approached this Court being aggrieved by inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in not considering the case of the petitioner in terms of the O.M. dated 17.09.2015. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner’s mother, Late Chalievinuo died in harness on 25.08.2016. At that time, the petitioner’s mother was working as Cook at Naga Hospital, Kohima, Nagaland under the Health & Family Welfare Department, Government of Nagaland. The petitioner submitted an application on 29.08.2016 to the Principal Director, Health & Family Welfare, Nagaland, Kohima and the said application was duly recommended and forwarded to the competent authority for consideration of appointment under the compassionate scheme as per the rules of the said scheme. Page No.# 3/8 3. It is the further case of the petitioner that the Principal Director, Directorate of Health & Family Welfare, Nagaland had also made a declaration on 05.06.2023 certifying that the petitioner’s family does not have any family member employed in government service, thereby eligible for compassionate appointment as per the O.M. Sl.No. 6 of the Compassionate Appointment Scheme as per the documentation. It is alleged by the petitioner that there was no consideration of the petitioner’s case in terms with the O.M. dated 17.09.2015, for which the petitioner had approached this Court by filing the present writ petition on 11.11.2024. 4. The records reveal that this Court vide an order dated 12.11.2024 issued notice. 5. Subsequent thereto, an affidavit-in-opposition was filed by the R-1, 2 & 3. In the said affidavit-in-opposition, which has been filed by the Additional Secretary, Health & Family Welfare Department, it was mentioned that the case of the petitioner is under consideration and as per the list maintained District-Wise for appointment on compassionate grounds, the petitioner’s name stands at Sl.No. 2. The District-Wise Grade- IV Compassionate Applications till March 2026 list was enclosed as Annexure-3. 6. This Court finds it very pertinent to reproduce paragraph-4 of the said affidavit-in-opposition inasmuch as in the said paragraph it has been categorically mentioned that the petitioner would be considered as and when her turn accrues and upon availability of a sanctioned vacant post. Page No.# 4/8 Paragraph-4 of the said affidavit is reproduced herein under: ‘4. That with regard to the statements made in paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the Writ Petition, the answering deponent admits to the extent borne out of records. The answering deponent respectfully submits that in consonance with the OM No. AR-8/8/78 dated 17th September, 2015 ‘Revised Compassionate Appointment Scheme for State Government employees who died in harness’, and the Addendum dated 9th April, 2019, the Department of the answering deponent is maintaining a waiting list in chronological order as envisaged in Clause 7 of the OM No. AR-8/8/78 dated 17th September, 2015. The answering deponent humbly submits that on 13.03.2026, the answering deponent had submitted before this Hon’ble Court that the petitioner herein was placed at Serial No. 1 under Phek District in the waiting list for compassionate appointment and that her case for appointment on compassionate ground shall be considered as and when her turn comes. However, on careful scrutiny of the compassionate applicants, it was found that vide Order dated 01.08.2022 passed in WPC No. 68/2020, this Hon’ble High Court had directed the State Respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment of compassionate ground strictly in terms of the OM dated 17.09.2015. That WPC No. 68/2020 was filed by one Smti. Dzuthokholu Kheso whose husband had died in harness on 02.05.2016. That at the time of disposal of the said writ petition (WP( No. 68/2020), the petitioner/Smti. Dzuthokholu Kheso stood at Serial No. 21 in the waiting list for appointment of compassionate ground. That however, the case of the petitioner/Smti. Dzuthokholu Kheso in WPC No. 68/2020 is yet to be considered since her turn has not yet reached. That Clause 1 of the Addendum dated 09.04.2019 stipulates that “Compassionate appointment to Group-C and D posts under this Scheme shall be strictly in order of date of death and first preference shall always be given against those who have died earlier...” As such, in consonance with the said Addendum, in the latest revised waiting list for appointments on compassionate ground, Smti. Dzuthokholu Kheso stands at Serial No. 1 and the present writ petitioner now stands at Serial No. 2. The answering deponent respectfully submits that since the Petitioner stands at Serial No. 2 under Phek District in the waiting list for compassionate appointment, the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground shall be considered commensurate to her qualification as and when her turn comes, subject to when a clear sanctioned post vacancy arises in the department.’ 7. This Court has also taken note of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner had submitted the Page No.# 5/8 application in the year 2016 and on account of the application of the petitioner being considered on a District-Wise basis, which is otherwise not a mandate in terms with the O.M. dated 17.09.2015, the petitioner as on date still awaits for her turn for appointment on compassionate basis, i.e., a decade after the death of her mother. The learned counsel, further, drawing reference to the District-Wise Grade-IV Compassionate Applications, which is Annexure-3 to the affidavit-in-opposition, submitted that in many of the Districts, the persons who have applied much later would be granted appointment on compassionate basis though the person against whom claims have been made have died much later than that of the petitioner’s mother. The learned counsel further referred to Clause 1 of the Addendum dated 09.04.2019 and submitted that Compassionate Appointment to Group-C and D posts under the Scheme were required to be strictly in order of the date of death, i.e., first preference should be always given to those who have died earlier. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that allowing the appointment on the basis of compassionate appointment in certain districts to a person who has died much later than the mother of the petitioner is not only contrary to the Scheme but also violates the mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution. 8. Mr. Longkumer, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that appointment on the grounds of compassionate appointment is an exception to Article 14 and 16 and it is on the basis of a policy of the Government to provide succor to those persons who have suffered on account of the death of the sole breadwinner of the family. He further submitted that the Personnel & Page No.# 6/8 Administrative Reforms Department had issued an O.M. dated 04.06.2016, wherein it is stipulated that in respect of the recruitment of Grade-III and IV posts in the district offices for direct recruitment vacancies accruing in Grade-IV posts shall be filled up by indigenous inhabitants of the respective districts. He, therefore, submits that it is on the basis of this O.M. dated 04.06.2016 being applied to the O.M. dated 17.09.2015, the respondent authorities have maintained a District-Wise List for appointments on compassionate grounds. 9. This Court had given an anxious consideration to the respective submissions and has also perused the materials on record. The materials on record and more particularly paragraph-4 of the affidavit filed by the R- 1, 2 & 3 as quoted hereinabove, shows that the case of the petitioner herein is under consideration inasmuch as the petitioner is at Sl.No. 2 of the List, in so far as the Phek District is concerned. It is also mentioned in the said paragraph that the petitioner’s case would be considered as and when there is a vacant sanctioned post available. This Court has also given an anxious consideration to the submission as to whether the appointment on compassionate basis should be made District-Wise or there is a requirement of taking into consideration of all the applications together irrespective of the district. The settled law stipulates that appointment on compassionate basis is not a source of recruitment. It is rather based upon a policy of the Government to provide succor to the family on account of expiry of the sole bread-earner. The O.M. dated 17.09.2015, which has been enclosed with the writ petition categorically mentions that appointments on compassionate ground shall be made only on regular basis to direct recruitment posts, and only if regular vacancies Page No.# 7/8 made for that purpose are available in the department where the deceased government employee was serving. It is also relevant to take note of the O.M. dated 04.06.2016 to which Mr. Longkumer, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents had referred to which stipulates that all direct recruitment vacancies accruing in Grade-IV posts in the district offices shall be filled up by indigenous inhabitants of the respective districts. 10. Under such circumstances, in the opinion of this Court, maintaining the District-Wise List by the respondent authorities cannot be said to be unreasonable or contrary to the O.M. Under such circumstances, the instant writ petition stands disposed of with the following observations and directions: I.The petitioner herein be considered in terms with the O.M. dated 17.09.2015 read with the Addendum dated 09.04.2019. II.It is seen that in the Phek District, the petitioner’s name is at Sl.No. 2 and the petitioner has been awaiting appointment for almost a decade. Under such circumstances, as and when a vacancy arises for the petitioner to be granted appointment, the respondent authorities shall grant appointment to the petitioner on compassionate grounds in terms with the O.M. dated 17.09.2015. III.This Court further observes that as the petitioner had filed the application within the stipulated period as mentioned in the O.M. dated 17.09.2015, there shall be no denial to the petitioner’s application on the ground of her age. The petitioner shall be granted Page No.# 8/8 the necessary age-relaxation, if so required. IV.The petitioner shall serve a copy of this Judgment to the Additional Secretary, Health & Family Welfare Department, Government of Nagaland for necessary compliance. JUDGE Comparing Assistant