Ranjan Dutta v. The State of Assam and 3 Ors

ORDER

02.02.2023 Heard Dr. B N Gogoi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P N Sarma, learned Standing counsel, Department of School (Elementary) Education, Assam for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 4. Also heard Ms. D Das Barman, learned Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent No. 3. It is stated by the petitioner that his father, David Dutta, an Assistant Teacher at Balahi Tamuli Lower Primary School, Ghilamara, District–Lakhimpur died in harness on

07.12.2005 and that he applied for his compassionate appointment as an Assistant Teacher in Lower Primary School within the stipulated time in terms of the Office Memorandum No. ABP50/2006/Pt/182 dated 01.06.2015 of the State Government in the Personnel (B) Department. It is also stated by the petitioner that he is a Higher Secondary passed and fulfills the requisite eligibility for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher in Upper Primary/ Lower Primary schools of the district concerned. As the case of the petitioner for his compassionate appointment has not been considered, he approached the authorities concerned. During such approach, he came to know that the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur by communication No. LPE.5/2022/2 dated 07.03.2022 informed all the Heads of the Departments including the District Elementary Education Officer, Lakhimpur, North-Lakhimpur informing that the meeting of the District Level Committee for the purpose of appointment on compassionate ground shall be held after the U.L.B (Urban Local Bodies) Election, 2022 and by the said letter the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur requested the District Elementary Education Officer (DEEO), Lakhimpur to submit the pending proposals prior to 01.04.2017, if any, along with vacancy positions of Grade III and Grade IV to him within the stipulated time. Page No.# 3/4 In this regard, the petitioner has placed the decisions of this Court in the cases of Achyut Ranjan Das & Ors -Vs.- State of Assam and Ors; reported in 2006 (4) GLT 674, Faziron Nessa and Ors. -Vs.- State of Assam and Ors; reported in 2010 (4) GLT 340, Ajit Pator & Ors. -Vs-State of Assam and Ors; reported in 2009 (3) GLT 306 and other relevant Office Memorandum of the State Government regarding compassionate appointment. The Admit Card of High School Leaving Certificate Examination of the petitioner shows his date of birth as 01.03.1990. As such, he was only 15 years 9 months at the time of death of his father. The entire case of the petitioner evolves on the particular letter of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur dated 07.03.2022, noted above, by which the said authority directed the DEEO, Lakhimpur to submit all the proposals that are pending for consideration for compassionate appointment prior to 01.04.2017 as a meeting of the District Level Committee for compassionate appointment was scheduled immediately after the U.L.B Election, 2022. Though the petitioner stated that he submitted his application for his compassionate appointment under the Die-in-Harness Scheme after the death of his father, who expired on 07.12.2005, but he failed to state as to when he filed his application for his compassionate appointment after the death of his father. The Court in the case of Faziron Nessa (Supra) have fixed the time limit for filing application for compassionate appointment by the dependent of an Government Employee who dies in harness i.e., one year from the date of death of the said Government Employee, which is also reflected in the Office Memorandum dated 01.06.2015. In the case in hand, the petitioner have failed to place before the Court regarding filing of his said application for compassionate appointment within the said time limit fixed by the Court with regard to consideration of compassionate appointment under the Die-in-Harness Scheme after the death of his father on 07.12.2005, who died about seventeen years back. It is well settled that – the Compassionate Appointment is given as an immediate measure only to get over the death of the bread earner at that point of time and there can not be any vested right on such appointment except that such Page No.# 4/4 consideration can only be done as per prevailing policy. After passage of long time, the sense of immediacy gets lost. The very raison d'etre for giving compassionate appointment or compassionate benefit is lost once the immediacy has died down. Once the long time passed by, the compassionate element stands extinguished. A family who could survive for long years would not be entitled to any compassionate benefit since compassionate benefit is not a largesse nor it is a rule in the employment. Accordingly, this writ petitioner being devoid of merits stands dismissed.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010051462022 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:ooWP(C)/3923/2022 RANJANoDUTTA S/OoLATEoDEVIDoDUTTA oR/OoVILLAGE-oMILANoNAGAR oPO.oANDoP.S.oGHILAMARA oDISTRICT-oLAKHIMPUR oASSAM oPIN-o787053. oVERSUS THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo3oORS REPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARYoTOoTHEo GOVERNMENToOFoASSAM oELEMENTARYoEDUCATIONoDEPARTMENT oJANATAoBHAWAN oDISPUR oGUWAHATI-05 oASSAM. 2:THEoDIRECTORoOFoELEMENTARYoEDUCATION oASSAM KAHILIPARA oGUWAHATI-19. o3:THEoDEPUTYoCOMMISSIONER oLAKHIMPUR ASSAM. o4:THEoDISTRICToELEMENTARYoEDUCATIONoOFFICER oLAKHIMPUR DISTRICT-oNORTHoLAKHIMPUR oASSAM. o------------ oAdvocateoforo:oDR.oBoNoGOGOI Page No.# 2/4 Advocate for : SC ELEM. EDU appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK