MWDWMFRU BRAHMA v. THE STATE OF ASSAM
Court: Gauhati High Court
Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
Judgment date:
Case summary
Gauhati High Court judgment dated 2020-12-10. MWDWMFRU BRAHMA v. THE STATE OF ASSAM. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Page No. # 1/3 GAHC010011982018 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/423/2018 MWDWMFRU BRAHMA S/O LT. AMAL CH. BRAHMA R/O VILL- NEPALPARA P. O. SERFANGURI P. S. SERFANGURI DIST. KOKRAJHAR, BTAD, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOV. T OF ASSAM, PWD, DISPUR, GUWAHATI- 2:DISTRICT LEVEL SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR APPOINTMENT ON COMPASSIONATE GROUND REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP METROPOLITAN DISTRICT. 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP METROPOLITAN DISTRICT GUWAHATI-1. 4:THE DIRECTOR ASSAM ROAD RESEARCH AND TRAINING INSTITUTE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ROAD FATASHIL AMBARI GUWAHATI-25. 5:SHRI DIPANKAR BORA Page No. # 2/3 S/O NOT KNOWN ADDRESS ASSAM ROAD RESEARCH AND TRAINING INSTITUTE PWD FATASHIL AMBARI GUWAHATI-25 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T DEURI Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA ORDER Date : 10. 12.
2020 Heard Mr. T. Deuri, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. M. D. Borah, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3. There is no representation from respondent nos. 4 and 5. By filing this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the case projected by the petitioner is that his father had died on 06. 08. 2016 while discharging his duties as Chowkidar in the Office of the respondent no. 4 and accordingly, on 01. 09. 2016, the petitioner had submitted a representation to the respondent no. 4 for appointing him on compassionate ground. The said claim was put up before the respondent no. 4, who had recommended the name of respondent no. 5 for appointment on compassionate ground in a Grade-III post in the Office of the respondent no. 4. Alleging that the case of the petitioner was not considered, present writ petition has been filed claiming appointment on compassionate ground. The State respondent no.
3 has filed an affidavit-in-opposition wherein a stand has been taken that based on availability of vacancy and financial condition of both the candidates, the proposal of respondent no. 5 was recommended and the proposal of the petitioner got rejected as his elder brother was a Govt. employee. It appears from the minutes of the District Level Committee meeting held on 21. 04. 2017 that while discussing the proposal of the petitioner and the respondent no. 5, the District Level Committee arrived at a Page No. # 3/3 conclusion that the elder brother of the petitioner is a Govt. servant. Although the learned counsel for the petitioner has verbally submitted that there is a family dispute between the petitioner and his elder brother and that they are residing separately, but in the considered opinion of the Court, the mere fact that the brother of the petitioner is residing separately is of no consequence as the immediate family member of the petitioner’s deceased father is a Govt.
employee. In the present case in hand, the petitioner has not assailed the finding recorded by the District Level Committee that the elder brother of the petitioner is a Govt. servant, as such, this writ petition fails on merit as the immediate family member of the father of the petitioner already has got Govt. service. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Source: Gauhati High Court. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.