Point of law : It is no longer res integra that compassionate appointments are made in order to enable the family members of the deceased employee to tide over the immediate hardship and the misfortune that has befallen on the family because of expiry of the sole earning member of the family.

JUDGMENT :

SOUMITRA SAIKIA, J.

1. The appellant as the writ petitioner approached this Court by filing WP(C) No. 1636/2017 challenging the inaction of the respondent authorities in respect of his application dated 27.10.2016 seeking compassionate appointment. The writ petition was dismissed and being aggrieved the present writ appeal has been filed.

2. From the pleadings on record, it is seen that the appellant’s Late father was employed as ‘Gram Sevak’ under Chamaria Development Block under the Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, Government of Assam. The father of the appellant, namely, late Kumud Patowary died-in-harness on 27.09.2011. Pursuant to the death of his father, the appellant filed his application dated 25.11.2011 seeking compassionate appointment. His application was forwarded to the District Level Committee which was constituted by the Government of Assam for consideration of cases for compassionate appointment. In its meeting held on 27.03.2012 the District Level Committee rejected his case on the ground of want of vacancies. In the minutes of the District Level Committee meeting held on 27.03.2012 it was reflected therein that his case would be considered again as and when the vacancy arises. Thereafter, his case was again considered by another District Level Committee and in its meeting held on 28.09.2012, his candidature was rejected on the ground that he was under qualified for the post of ‘Gram Sevak’. Pursuant to his application being rejected for the second time by the District Level Committee, it is submitted by the appellant that upon being advised by the Members of the District Level Committee, the appellant submitted another application on 27.10.2016 for compassionate appointment.

3. As no decision was being taken on the said application submitted by the applicant, he approached this Court again by way of a writ petition being WP(C) No. 1636/2017. During the course of hearing of the said writ petition, the learned counsel for the State respondents submitted that the appellant’s application dated 27.10.2016 may have been placed before the District Level Committee and consideration thereof might have been given. The said writ petition accordingly came to be disposed of vide order dated 03.11.2017 upon the statement made by the Departmental counsel that the petitioner’s application must have been placed before the District Level Committee. The respondent authorities were directed to furnish to the appellant a copy of the decision taken thereon by the District Level Committee. It was further directed that in the event the application of the appellant was not placed before the District Level Committee, the respondents were directed to place the said application of the appellant dated 27.10.2016 before the next available District Level Committee of Kamrup(Rural) district.

4. Pursuant to the said order, copy of the minutes of the meeting of the District Level Committee for recommendation of cases for appointment on compassionate ground of Kamrup(Rural) district were made available to the appellant. In respect of the application of the appellant, the proposal was rejected on the ground that the criteria of “3(three) years of Service” of the deceased employee according to the Government O.M. No. ABP 50/2006/Pt/182 dated 01.06.2015 was not fulfilled by the deceased father of the appellant. His father expired on 27.09.2011 and his date of retirement would have been 31.01.2014. Being aggrieved by the said rejection of his application for compassionate appointment, the appellant approached this Court for a second time by way of a writ petition being WP(C) No. 132/2021. The learned Single Judge vide the impugned order dated 20.08.2021 dismissed the writ petition. Being aggrieved the present writ appeal has been filed.

5. The learned counsel for the writ appellant submits that the appellant had approached this Court without any delay in applying for appointment on compassionate ground. She submits that the fath