ABDUL KASHIM BARBHUIYA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM
LAWS(GAU)-2019-10-26
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on October 04,2019

Abdul Kashim Barbhuiya Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ASSAM Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

STATE OF MANIPUR VS. MD. RAJAODIN [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY KUMAR VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Heard Mr. A.M. Borbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.R. Baruah, learned Government Advocate, Assam and Mr. N. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department.
(2.)The matter pertains to appointment of the petitioner under the die-in-harness scheme. The petitioner's father Late Mainul Haque Barbhuiya was serving as an Assistant Teacher (Assamese Language Teacher) in Nimaichandpur M.V. School who died in harness on 10.10 . 2003. It appears that on the date of death of the petitioner's father, he was a minor (15 years 8 months old). On attaining the age of majority and passing his Class-X Examination, the petitioner applied for his compassionate appointment in Grade-III post as an L.P. School Teacher under 5% quota for die-in-harness scheme of the State, which was forwarded by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Hailakandi to the Director of Elementary Education, Assam on 06.02.2007. As the case of the petitioner was not considered by the District Level Committee (DLC) for compassionate appointment in Hailakandi District, the petitioner approached this Court by filing a writ petition being, WP(C) No. 3068/2008 and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court by order dated 23.07. 2008 disposed of the said WP(C) No. 3086/2008 by directing the respondents therein to process the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment in terms of the guidelines laid down in the case of Achyut Ranjan Das -Vs- State of Assam & Ors, 2006 (4) GLT 674. Though the DLC, Hailakandi held its meeting on 05. 03.2010, the said Committee did not consider the case of the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner again approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.3575/2011 which was also disposed of on 10.06.2016 in the light of the direction issued in WP(C) No.3086/2008 on 23.07.2008.
(3.)The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the direction of this Court, the DLC by its impugned minutes dated 31.12.2018 rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner filed his application after three years of death of his father which is not sustainable in law and accordingly, has approached this Court for the third time by filing this writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that as per the decision of this Court rendered in WP(C) No.364/2018, (2018) 3 GLR 627, it is improper for the authorities to reject the applicant's application for compassionate appointment upon attaining the age of majority in a circumstance where the concerned applicant was minor at the time of death of the deceased employee and therefore, prays that the application of the petitioner should be reconsidered.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.