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) 16014

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 not a vested right but an exception intended to provide immediate financial relief to families of deceased employees; a claim becomes stale and loses its force after long delays or prolonged pendency, as the sense of immediacy necessary to justify such an appointment is lost.

Headnote:(A) Compassionate Appointment - Delay - Lapse of time - Death-in-harness - Held, compassionate appointment is not a source of recruitment or a vested right - It is meant to provide immediate succor to a family in financial crisis following a breadwinner's death - Where a significant period has elapsed (16 years in this case), the sense of immediacy is lost, and the claim becomes stale - Principles regarding the validity of applications pending for over two years under the relevant Office Memorandum and judicial precedents reaffirmed. (Paras 10, 11, 14, 15)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, son of an employee who died-in-harness on 02-02-2010, applied for compassionate appointment in 2014. Despite multiple rejections due to lack of vacancies and subsequent litigation, the petitioner challenged the latest rejection by the District Level Committee, which concluded the application had spent its force under the prevailing Office Memorandum guidelines.

Findings of Court:
The court held that the claim for compassionate appointment had become stale due to the 16-year delay since the date of death. It found that the authorities acted correctly in rejecting the application as it had spent its force per established principles, and further noted that the purpose of compassionate appointment is to address an immediate financial crisis, which was no longer relevant here.

Issues: Whether the persistent delay of 16 years renders a claim for compassionate appointment stale and whether the rejection of the application by the committee following the 'spent force' principle under the Office Memorandum was valid.

Ratio Decidendi: Compassionate appointment is a humanitarian measure of limited duration intended to provide immediate relief; it does not vest as a right. When the urgency of the initial crisis abates or long periods of time pass, there is no mandate to grant such appointments, especially if the application has remained pending for over two years without vacancy, thereby losing its force.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. procedural history of compassionate appointment application and its rejection. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. application of the 'spent force' principle for long-pending claims. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. dismissal of claims due to the staleness of the request and lack of immediacy. (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. 10 of the OM dated 01-06-2015.

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