LATIKA GOALA Vs. STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A.M. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.S. Roy, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

(2.) By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for setting aside and quashing of (i) communication dtd. 16/11/2018 issued by the Additional Labour Commissioner, Guwahati, and (ii) minutes of the SLC meeting dtd. 7/12/2010 in so far as it relates to rejection of the candidature of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground.

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that her husband, while working as a Lower Division Assistant (LDA for short) in the office of the Labour Officer, Hailakandi (respondent no. 4), had died-in-harness on 29/6/2003. Thereafter, the petitioner had applied for appointment on compassionate ground in any Grade-IV post. It is projected that OM dtd. 9/9/1983 was prevailing at the time when the husband of the petitioner had died and when she had applied for compassionate appointment. Thereafter, the case of the petitioner was put up before the DLC. The DLC in its meeting held on 5/3/2010, recommended the name of the petitioner for being appointed against a single vacancy of Grade-IV which had occurred during the year 2000. However, as the appointment did not materialize, the petitioner had submitted a representation dtd. 18/10/2018 before the Labour Commissioner, Assam (respondent no. 3) for appointing her on compassionate ground. However, she was informed vide letter dtd. 16/11/2018 that the SLC, by its minutes dtd. 7/12/2010, had rejected her candidature on the ground of there being no vacancy position available in the office of the Labour Officer, Hailakandi (respondent no. 4) till 2003 (within two years of the death of her husband). Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the rejection of the case of the petitioner was illegal and the delay in approaching this Court has been explained by submitting that the SLC minutes dtd. 7/12/2010 was communicated to the petitioner only vide communication dtd. 16/11/2018 and therefore, the petitioner had filed this writ petition on 2/9/2019.