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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 14898

GAUHATI HIGH COURT
N. Unni Krishnan Nair, J
Mahfuz Ahmed Laskar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam – Respondent
WP(C)/1285/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: F A Laskar, A Malek
For the Respondents: SC, Elem. Edu, GA, Assam

Compassionate appointment is an exceptional measure intended to provide immediate financial relief to families of deceased government employees; claims become stale if not resolved promptly and are subject to time-based expiration under departmental schemes when vacancies are unavailable.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Appointment on compassionate grounds - Delay - Claim stale after 16 years - The objective of compassionate appointment is to provide immediate financial relief to the family of a deceased employee. Where significant delay occurs, the sense of immediacy is lost. (Paras 13, 14, 15)

(B) Compassionate Appointment - Scheme - Principle of limitation - An application for compassionate appointment that remains pending for two years due to want of vacancies loses its force. (Paras 10, 11, 12)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner’s father died in harness on 2nd February 2010. The petitioner applied for compassionate appointment in 2014. The claim was repeatedly considered and rejected over the years due to lack of vacancies and the application spending its force under the prevailing Office Memorandum guidelines, leading to the current writ petition challenging the rejection resolution dated 16th August 2025.

Findings of Court:
The court found that approximately 16 years had elapsed since the death of the bread-earner. Following the principles in Achyut Ranjan Das and the Supreme Court decision in State of West Bengal v. Debabrata Tiwari, the court held that the claim had become stale, the sense of immediacy was lost, and the application had spent its force according to the guidelines.

Issues: Whether the denial of compassionate appointment after 16 years was justified, and whether the application had lost its force under the applicable departmental guidelines.

Ratio Decidendi: Compassionate appointment is not a vested right but an exception to provide immediate relief; when a significant period of time has lapsed, the financial crisis the scheme intended to mitigate is assumed to have been managed, rendering the claim stale.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. procedural background and summary of grievance. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. summary of rival contentions regarding departmental schemes. (Para 5 , 6)
3. application of existing guidelines and precedent regarding stale claims. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. legal standard for denying stale claims based on the lapse of time. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)

ORDER

Heard Mr. F.A. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. P. Das, learned standing counsel, Secondary Education, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 & 5 and Ms. S. Konwar, learned Govt. Advocate, Assam appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 to 4.

2. The petitioner in the present proceeding has presented a challenge to a resolution adopted by the jurisdictional District Level Committee (DLC) in its meeting held on 16-08-2025, towards rejecting the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds, on the ground that the application as submitted by the petitioner in this connection, had lost its force in terms of the scheme in place.

3. The father of the petitioner late Motiur Rahman Laskar while working as Chowkidar of Dudpur M.E. Madrassa, Silchar in the district of Cachar had died-in-harness on 02-02-2010. Pursuant to the death of the father of the petitioner, he had submitted an application for appointment on compassionate grounds on 07-07-2014. The said application was, thereafter, forwarded to the District Elementary Education Officer, Cachar on 07-07-2014. The District Level Committee (DLC), Cachar in its meeting held on 27-10-2017 considered the application submitted by the petitioner and the same was rejected due to want of vacancies. The said application being rejected, the petitioner had approached this Court by way of instituting a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 5711/2022 challenging the resolution of the jurisdictional DLC. A Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21-10-2022, had disposed of the said writ petition with a direction upon the respondent authorities to place the case of the petitioner before the jurisdictional DLC, for consideration as per Clause-15 of the Office Memorandum dated 01-06-2015. The application submitted by the petitioner was considered by the jurisdictional DLC in its meeting held on 30-01-2024, however, the application of the petitioner came to be rejected on the ground that there was no vacant post available within the 5% quota mandated for appointment on compassionate grounds. It is to be noted that the jurisdictional DLC had considered the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds in the parent office as well as in other offices.

4. The petitioner being aggrieved by the rejection of his application for appointment on compassionate grounds again approached this Court by way of instituting a writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 457/2025. In the said application an office memorandum dated 18-09-2024, by which it was informed that the cases for appointment on compassionate grounds of family members of Government servants who had died-in-harness prior to 31-03-2017, would not be entertained by the Administrative Department/ Authority for any reason whatsoever nor be placed before the constituted committee for consideration, was also assailed. A Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03-04-2025 proceeded to dispose of the said writ petition, along with other analogous matters, by directing that the applications of the petitioners, therein, shall be considered by the constituted committee, by taking into consideration various guidelines issued prior to 01-04-2017, for consideration of cases of applicants, for appointment on compassionate grounds. Accordingly, the application submitted by the petitioner was again placed before the jurisdictional DLC in its meeting held on 16-08-2025. The Committee upon considering the applications submitted by the petitioner proceeded to reject the same by holding that the same had spent its force as per Principle No.

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