IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM; NAGALAND; MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
R.M. CHHAYA, SOUMITRA SAIKIA, JJ.
Sri Dipjyoti Kalita, Son of Sri Niren Kalita - Appellant
Versus
The State of Assam - Respondent
Writ Appeal No. 230 of 2022
Decided on : 20-09-2022
Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 and 309 - Died - Claim - Preferential appointment Appellant that his father was an active participant of the Assam Movement - It is the further case of appellant that while taking part in Assam Movement, his father sustained injuries and because of injury so sustained, his father became physically disabled - Reliving upon a certificate dated issued by the All Assam Students' Union, appellant claims that he is entitled to preferential appointment being a son of the victim - Appellant has also relied upon a certificate dated issued by Additional Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat to effect that his father was a 'victim' in connection with his participation in Assam Movement on the problem of foreigners
Finding of Court :
A bare reading of aforesaid provisions of Rules clearly stipulates that Rules would be applicable only in case of next kin of the person who is a martyr or who is physically disabled and not in case of a person who had participated in Assam Movement and had sustained injury like in the case on hand - Even words "Physically Disabled" as defined in Rules clearly stipulate that such disability may be of any major part of the body leading to total disablement due to bullet injury or otherwise in connection with Assam Movement on the problem of foreigners - Certificate dated was issued by All Assam Students' Union after a long period of almost twenty one years and two years thereafter certificate dated was issued by Additional District Magistrate, Nagaon - Even medical certificate which is heavily relied upon by appellant does not inspire any confidence about its veracity - Even without going into said aspect of the matter, father of appellant only sustained a cut injury and there is nothing on record to show that the said injury resulted into physical disability of father of appellant
Result : Appeal dismissed
JUDGMENT :
R.M.Chhaya, J
Heard Mr. B. Islam, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. R.K. Borah, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondents.
2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 24.05.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 3179/2022, the appellant/original petitioner has preferred this appeal.
3. The following facts emerge from the record of the appeal:
It is the case of the appellant that his father Sri Niren Kalita was an active participant of the Assam Movement. It is the further case of the appellant that while taking part in the Assam Movement, his father sustained injuries and because of the injury so sustained, his father became physically disabled. Relying upon a certificate dated 09.06.2017 issued by the All Assam Students’ Union, the appellant claims that he is entitled to preferential appointment being a son of the victim. The appellant has also relied upon a certificate dated 31.07.2019 issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat to the effect that his father was a ‘victim’ in connection with his participation in the Assam Movement on the problem of foreigners. Thus, it is the case of the appellant that as per the provisions of the Assam Public Services (Preferential Appointment) Rules, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’ for the sake of brevity), he has every right to get employment under the provisions of the Rules. The record indicates that the appellant approached the authorities by filing representation dated 15.11.2021, which was not considered and hence, the appellant approached this Court by way of filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the authorities to appoint him in any Grade-III post under the provisions of the Rules. The appellant/original petitioner predominantly relied upon the certificate dated 09.06.2017 issued by the All Assam Students’ Union, which is in the form of “Victim Certificate” and so also the certificate dated 31.07.2019 issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat, which is to the effect that the appellant’s father was a ‘victim’ in connection with his participation in the Assam Movement on the problem of foreigners.
4. The learned Single Judge after hearing the learned counsels for the parties, was pleased to dismiss the writ petition and hence, this appeal.
5. Mr. B. Islam, learned counsel for the appellant reiterated the contentions which were raised before the learned Single Judge and contended that the petitioner belongs to the category of ‘Affected Candidate’ as defined in Rule 2(a) of the Rules and, as such, the appellant would be entitled to preferential appointment. It was contended by Mr. Islam that the learned Single Judge has not considered the materials on record and has wrongly come to the conclusion that the father of the appellant did not suffer from any physical disability as per the provisions of Rule 2(f) of the Rules and thus committed an error in dismissing the writ petition. It was also contended that the learned Single Judge has wrongly brushed aside the cogent evidence in the form of certificate issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat as well as by All Assam Students’ Union. It was therefore contended that the appeal be allowed, as prayed for.
6. Per contra, Mr. R.K. Borah, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam has contended that the learned Single Judge has not committed any error in dismissing the writ petition. Mr. Borah contended that only because the relationship is established, the same would not ipso facto mean that the appellant would be entitled to the benefits under the Rules. Mr. Borah contended that the certificate issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Golaghat is only to the effect that the appellant’s father was a victim in connection with his participation in the Assam Movement on the problem of foreign
SupremeToday
Point of Law : 10. Rules clearly stipulates that Rules would be applicable only in case of next kin of person who is a martyr or who is physically disabled and not in case of a person who had partici....
Point of Law : 10. Rules would be applicable only in case of next kin of the person who is a martyr or who is physically disabled and not in case of a person who had participated in Assam Movement li....
Point of Law : 10. Rules would be applicable only in case of next kin of the person who is a martyr or who is physically disabled and not in case of a person who had participated in Assam Movement li....
Rules would be applicable only in case of next kin of person who is a martyr or who is physically disabled and not in case of a person who had participated in Assam Movement like in the case on hand.
Point of Law : 10. Rules would be applicable only in case of next kin of the person who is a martyr or who is physically disabled and not in case of a person who had participated in Assam Movement li....
Point of Law : 10. Rules clearly stipulates that Rules would be applicable only in case of next kin of person who is a martyr or who is physically disabled and not in case of a person who had partici....
Point of Law : Rules would be applicable only in case of next kin of the person who is a martyr or who is physically disabled and not in case of a person who had participated in Assam Movement and ha....
Preferential appointment under the APS(PA) Rules, 1999 does not guarantee selection irrespective of merit, and candidates must meet the specified criteria for inclusion in the select list.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.