Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 360 (GAU)

Nirupoma Nath v. State of Assam

2018-02-26

ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA

body2018
JUDGMENT & ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. F.A. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. D.Das Barman, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 and Mr. N. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for the Education Department appearing for the respondent No.2. 2. The father of the petitioner, who was serving as the Headmaster of Ratanpur Tuk ME School of Hailakandi district, died in harness on 20.11.2012. On his death, the petitioner submitted an application for compassionate appointment on 17.08.2013. Although in the said application, the petitioner may have stated that the application is for a compassionate appointment against the post of Assistant Teacher of Upper Primary School, but under the law, it is for the respondent authorities to consider any application for compassionate appointment against any available vacant post, for which the person may be duly qualified for. 3. In the instant case, by the resolution of the DLC of Hailakandi district dated 30.12.2014, the petitioner was recommended for the post of Assistant Teacher in Middle School against four available vacancies for the year 2014, but the SLC in its meeting of 16.06.2016 had rejected the case of the petitioner and one of the grounds stated for such rejection is that the petitioner did not have the required qualification for the purpose. 4. Although a stand has also been taken that the SLC had rejected the claim on an additional ground of there being no vacancy, but the said ground cannot be accepted inasmuch as, as per the minutes of the DLC, there were 72 number of vacancies of Assistant Teachers in the Middle School for the year 2014 and 5% thereof would be approximately four and as four names were recommended, therefore, it cannot be stated that there was no vacancy for the petitioner. But as regards the other ground that the petitioner was not duly qualified, it is noticed that as per the qualification for the post of Assistant Teacher for Upper Primary School, the qualification is graduation as per the Rules. Admittedly, the petitioner is not a graduate and she has the qualification of Higher Secondary passed with 49% marks. 5. Mr. N. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for the Education Department submits that Higher Secondary with 45% for the reserved category is the qualification prescribed for Assistant Teacher in the Lower Primary School. Admittedly, the petitioner is not a graduate and she has the qualification of Higher Secondary passed with 49% marks. 5. Mr. N. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel for the Education Department submits that Higher Secondary with 45% for the reserved category is the qualification prescribed for Assistant Teacher in the Lower Primary School. The petitioner being an OBC candidate is entitled to such relaxation. Further, the petitioner has also passed the TET examination. 6. In the circumstance, as the law regarding compassionate appointment is that a consideration is required to be given against an appropriate post, for which the concerned person is qualified, it is deemed appropriate that the ends of justice would be met if the case of the petitioner is given a fresh consideration by the DLC of Hailakandi district against any vacant post available for which the petitioner is qualified for. The DLC shall also take note that the petitioner is qualified for the post of Assistant Teacher in a LP School, in addition to any other post that she may be otherwise qualified. 7. Accordingly, it is directed that the respondent authorities shall place the case of the petitioner before the next available DLC of Hailakandi district for its consideration as indicated above. In terms of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of.