High CourtsSingle Bench

Sanjoy Kumar Roy vs State Of Assam And 5 Ors

Gauhati HC · Decided on 18 February 2022 · Citation: (2022) 02 GAU CK 0044

HON’BLE JUDGES
Achintya Malla Bujor Barua, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1103 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

23 paragraphs · 465 words
1.

Heard Ms. SB Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. A Phukan, learned counsel for the respondents No. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 being the

authorities under the Elementary Education Department of the Government of Assam and Ms. DD Barman, learned Additional Senior Government

Advocate appearing for the respondent No. 6 being the Deputy Commissioner, Karimganj.

2.

The father of the petitioner Basanta Kumar Namasudra @ Basanta Kumar Roy, who was working as an Assistant Teacher of Sutarkandi LP

School in the Karimganj district, died in harness on 06.05.1998 and on his death, the petitioner submitted an application for compassionate appointment

on 28.05.1998. The said application was forwarded by the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Karimganj along with 63 other similar applications as per the

communication dated 08.09.2008. In other words, we have to understand that from 1998 to 2008, it was the Deputy Inspector of Schools, Karimganj

who had sat over the matter and had not done the needful to carry forward the application of the petitioner. Along with the communication, the

Deputy Inspector of Schools, Karimganj also provides a list of 64 applications that were forwarded and the list mentioned the applications to be

pending cases for compassionate appointment and the reason for delay is stated to be due to administrative reason.

3.

If we accept the communication of the Deputy Inspector of Schools that because of some administrative reason the application of the petitioner

was not forwarded to the DLC, the same is unconnected with any laches on the part of the petitioner for the application being not placed before the

DLC in time. However, even after the Deputy Inspector of Schools forwarded the application, still the application was not placed before the

concerned DLC for which no reason is forthcoming.

4.

Considering the matter in its entirety, the only view the Court can take is that the application was not placed before the concerned DLC not

because of any fault or laches on the part of the petitioner, but because of some other reason. Having arrived at such conclusion, we require the

District Elementary Education Officer, Karimganj to place the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment before the next available

DLC of Karimganj district for its consideration as per law.

5.

In order to facilitate the process, the petitioner may provide a copy of the application submitted earlier to the District Elementary Education Officer,

so that the District Elementary Education Officer can be saved from the difficulty of finding out the application, which was submitted in the year 1998.

We further provide that if the application of the petitioner was earlier placed before the DLC, the petitioner be provided the information as to the

outcome of such consideration.

The writ petition is allowed to the extent as indicated above.