SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 9596

HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE
DILNAWAZ AKTAR CHOUDHURY – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS – Respondent
WP(C) / 2519 / 2025



GAHC010096342025 2025:GAU-AS:17057

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/2519/2025

DILNAWAZ AKTAR CHOUDHURY

D/O- LATE ABU HANIF CHOUDHURY, VILL.- SIBNARAINPUR, P.O.

SIALTEK, P.S. KATIGORAH, DIST. CACHAR, ASSAM, PIN- 788802.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS

REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE

GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, DISPUR,

GUWAHATI-06.

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

PERSONNEL (B) DEPARTMENT

DISPUR

GUWAHATI-06.

3:THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM

PERSONNEL (B) DEPARTMENT

DISPUR

GUWAHATI-06.

4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

HAILAKANDI

DIST. HAILAKANDI

ASSAM

PIN- 788151.

5:THE DISTRICT LEVEL COMMITTEE (DLC)

FOR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CASE FOR APPOINTMENT ON

COMPASSIONATE GROUND

HAILAKANDI

REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER

HAILAKANDI DIST. HAILAKANDI ASSAM PIN- 788151 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. H A LASKAR, MS D DUTTA,A. H. AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE

ORDER

Date : 10-12-2025 Heard Mr. H. A. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T. C. Chutia, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the State respondents.

2. The petitioner, by filing this writ petition, has challenged the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024, passed by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Personnel (B) Department, whereby, the Government’s existing policy/scheme of providing appointment to a family member of a Government servant on compassionate ground has been done away with, in complete suppression of the earlier OMs, notifications and policy/scheme relating to compassionate appointments, thereby, providing compassionate family pension in lieu of compassionate appointment.

3. The father of the petitioner, Late Abu Hanif Choudhury, died in harness on 17.02.2012 while serving as an Assistant Sub-Inspector (A.S.I.)

of Police under the Superintendent of Police, Hailakandi, Assam.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that she had submitted an application on 23.07.2012 under the Government’s policy/scheme for appointment on compassionate grounds. Aggrieved by the non-consideration of her application, she approached this Court by way of filing Writ Petition being WP(C) No. 1835/2024, which was subsequently withdrawn with liberty to challenge the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024. While her application was pending consideration by the respondent authorities, the issuance of the impugned Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 has adversely affected her right to be considered for appointment on compassionate grounds under the existing scheme.

5. It is stated at the Bar that this Court, in a batch of writ petitions, the leading case being Abdul Kadir Bokshi vs. The State of Assam & Ors., in WP(C) No. 342/2025, vide order dated 03.04.2025, directed that the applications for compassionate appointment of petitioners who had challenged the Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2024 and whose cases were pending before this Court as on 03.04.2025, be considered and disposed of on merit, taking into account the various guidelines in force prior to 01.04.2017. Pursuant thereto, the respondent authorities issued an Executive Order dated 30.08.2025, seeking applications and relevant documents from the persons whose cases are pending.

6. Mr. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that, in terms of the Executive Order seeking applications and relevant documents, the petitioner has duly submitted her application for appointment on compassionate grounds on 15.09.2025, during the pendency of this writ petition.

7. Mr. T. C. Chutia, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondents, submits that the case of the petitioner cannot be considered as she has filed the present Writ Petition after 03.04.2025 and this Court has clearly held in Abdul Kadir Bokshi (supra) that only cases which were pending before this Court as on 03.04.2025 should be conside

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top