Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1215 (GAU)

Puja Devi v. State of Assam

2019-11-11

N.KOTISWAR SINGH

body2019
ORDER : N. Kotiswar Singh, J. 1. Heard Mr. M. Dewan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. Mazumdar, learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department, Government of Assam. Also heard Mr. R. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department. 2. Matter pertains to rejection of the claim of the petitioner for appointment under die-in-harness scheme on account of delayed submission of application. 3. According to the petitioner, petitioner's father who was serving as an Assistant Teacher in Sollong Balak L.P. School under Kaliabor Education Block died on 10.2.2010. At the relevant time, petitioner was a minor and aged about 16 years. However, on attaining the age of majority, petitioner submitted the application for appointment under die-in-harness scheme on 05.11.2012. Though the matter was favourably considered by the District Level Committee, the State Level Committee dismissed the application of the petitioner on the ground that petitioner had submitted her application after one year of the death of the Government servant, i.e., late submission of application. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner relying on the decision of this Court in Trailokya Nath Vs. State of Assam & Ors., 2016 (5) GLT 310, submits that it has been held by this Court that the limitation period prescribed for filing application under die-in-harness scheme is not mandatory in nature but directory and as such authorities cannot act mechanically to dismiss any late application but has to consider the circumstances before rejecting a claim of compassionate appointment. 5. Learned Standing Counsel, Elementary Education Department submits that State Level Committee did not commit any error in rejecting the claim of the petitioner as the State Level Committee was merely following the norm on rejecting late submission of application. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Also perused the materials on record. 7. Admittedly, the petitioner submitted her application belatedly after one year from the date of death of the Government servant as mentioned in the proceedings of the State Level Committee. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Also perused the materials on record. 7. Admittedly, the petitioner submitted her application belatedly after one year from the date of death of the Government servant as mentioned in the proceedings of the State Level Committee. This Court is of the view that considering the decision of this Court in Trailokya Nath (supra), claim of the petitioner ought not to have been rejected merely on the ground of late submission of application, which is not mandatory but directory in nature as his well-settled that that appointment under die-in-harness scheme is to tide over the financial difficulties faced by the petitioner which should be the main consideration rather than being rejected on the technical ground of delayed submission by one year. 8. Accordingly present petition is allowed. Impugned decision of the State Level Committee dated 20.07.2017 rejecting the claim of the petitioner is hereby set aside. The matter is remanded to State Level Committee for re-consideration of the case of the petitioner and her case shall not be rejected merely on the ground of late submission of application. State Level Committee shall take up the case of the petitioner for consideration in its next meeting in terms of the decision of this Court in Trailokya Nath (supra) and also in terms of the recommendation made by District Level Committee.