KRISHNA BHARALI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. M. P. Sarma, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. R. R. Gogoi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 5. I have also heard Ms. S. Baruah, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 4.

(2.) The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities for not giving the petitioner's appointment on compassionate grounds as per the Government Memorandum dtd. 9/9/1983 and 2/3/2009 against the regular vacant post of any Grade-III in the Department of Excise and/or any other post as per the recommendation made by the District Level Committee vide its meeting dtd. 22/9/2010.

(3.) The brief facts of the instant case is that the petitioner's father was working as Havildar in Excise Department under Bihupuria Circle in the District of Lakhimpur who died in harness on 26/3/2010. The father of the petitioner left behind his wife, two unmarried daughters and two sons including the petitioner. Thereupon, the petitioner submitted an application on 24/4/2010 seeking appointment on compassionate ground through the Superintendent of Excise, Lakhimpur. In the meeting held on 22/9/2010, the petitioner was recommended for the post of Grade-III (Excise Constable) under the Excise Department and vide its letter dtd. 26/10/2010, the recommendation which included the name of the petitioner was placed before the State Level Committee. The State Level Committee however sat over the matter for a period of 3 (three) years for which the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by filing a writ petition being WP(C) No.3273/2014 thereby seeking a direction to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds. However, during the pendency of the said writ petition, it came to light that the petitioner's case was considered in the meeting held on 11/6/2014 wherein the petitioner's case was rejected on the ground of lack of vacancy and his application was considered to have spent its force. The petitioner immediately withdrew the said writ petition i.e. WP(C) No.3273/2014 with a liberty to challenge the decision of the State Level Committee. Subsequent thereto, the petitioner filed another writ petition i.e. WP(C) No.4248/2014 challenging the decision of the State Level Committee dtd. 11/6/2014. This Court however disposed of the said writ petition thereby setting aside the decision of the State Level Committee dtd. 11/6/2014 in respect to the petitioner and with a further direction upon the State Level Committee to reconsider the case of the petitioner against the existing available vacancy in the post of Excise Constable earmarked for appointment on compassionate ground.