Back
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
Kaushik Goswami, J
B. Hmangaihsanga – Appellant
Versus
State of Mizoram – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural history and factual background of the claim. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. contention regarding the nature of compassionate allowance. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. statutory interpretation of rule 41 regarding time limitations. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. discretionary nature of writ jurisdiction and stale claims. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. judicial review of the competent authority's discretionary assessment. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 6. conclusion of the petition based on lack of grounds for interference. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
ORDER
Date : 21.05.2026
Heard Ms. Ramengmawii, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Caroline K. Lungawipuii, learned Govt. Advocate for the State respondents.
2. By way of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner calls in question the Order dated 28.07.2025 issued by the respondent No. 4, whereby the claim of the petitioner for grant of compassionate allowance came to be rejected.
3. The foundational facts, shorn of unnecessary details, are that the petitioner was appointed as a Constable
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
