WP(C) 6829/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE U.B. SAHA The instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner, namely, Sri Nasim Ahmed La skar, son of a deceased government employee who died on 19.05.2004, for a direct ion to place the representation of the petitioner before the District Level Comm ittee by the respondent No. 3 for consideration of his case for appointment on c ompassionate ground i.e. under die-in-harness scheme by the District Level Commi ttee. Heard Mr. HI Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. MK Mi shra, learned Standing Counsel for the Education Department. As agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the prayer made in the writ petition, the same is taken up for fin al disposal at the motion stage. Brief facts of the case of the petitioner are as follows: - That the father of the petitioner, while in service as a Arabic Teacher of Kutubia ME Madrassa under the District Elementary Education, died on 19.05.20 04 leaving behind the petitioner and other dependent family members including th e mother of the petitioner. The petitioner passed HSLC examination in the year 2 006 and thereafter he could not prosecute his studies any further due to acute f inancial hardship on account of the death of his father. His mother submitted an application before the Block Elementary Education Officer, Hailakandi along wit h a duly sworn affidavit making a prayer for appointment of the petitioner on co mpassionate ground in terms of the scheme framed by the State of Assam in the ye ar 1983. On receipt of the aforesaid representation, the Block Level Education O fficer sent the same to the respondent No. 3 for consideration. On 17.12.2004 the petitioner himself submitted an application before the respond ent No. 4 as the respondent-authorities did not act on the earlier application f iled by his mother. Ever after filing of application by the petitioner, the resp ondent-authorities did not discharge their duty as required under the scheme and being aggrieved the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court which wa s registered as WP(C) 569/2006. The aforesaid writ petition of the petitioner wa s taken up by this Court along with 62 other cases. One of those cases was WP(C) 3875/2005 along with the other cases were taken up for hearing. After hearing t he Court laid down some principles on the basis of which the schemes relating to compassionate appointment will have to be considered. After disposal of the aforesaid writ petition along with other 162 cases the pet itioner again filed an application on 17.12.2007 to the District Elementary Educ ation Officer on compliance with the court’s order but the said representation h as not yet been disposed of by the respondent No. 3. Hence, the instant writ pet ition. Mr. Choudhury while urging for the relief sought for would contend that admitted ly when the deceased government employee, father of the petitioner, died the pet itioner had not attained the age of 18 years to be an adult as required under la w, but at the same time in none of the schemes since 1983, as amended up to date , the authority mentioned that at the time of death of a deceased government emp loyee, the near relative seeking job under compassionate ground, i.e. die-in-har ness scheme has to be of 18 years. He again contended that though the age is not prescribed in the scheme for the job seeker, relative of the deceased governmen t employee, but this Court in Fazirun Nessa V. State of Assam, 2010 (5) GLR 461, summing up the judgment of the Apex Court, directed the State respondents there in, inter alia, that while considering the case for compassionate appointment th e authority shall strictly adhere to the guidelines and principles laid down in Achut Ranjan Das and Ors V. State of Assam and Ors reported in 2006 (4) GLT 674. The Court also further extended the time limit for submission of application fo rm for appointment on compassionate ground, from 3 months to 12 months along wit h other directions. His further contention is that when there is no prescription in the scheme regar ding the age then it is open to the authority to consider the case of the petiti oner even after relaxing the age as the scheme is prepared for providing immedia te financial relief to the destitute family of the deceased government employee. Therefore, whether the age of the petitioner would be relaxed or not is with th e authority concerned but the respondent No. 3 is bound to forward the applicati on of the petitioner to the District Level Committee for consideration of his pr ayer. Mr. Misra while countering the submission of Mr. Choudhury would contend that ap pointment on compassionate ground is not a matter of right. A person can be cons idered for appointment on compassionate ground only when he fulfils the criteria laid down in the scheme prepared by the government. When the framer of the sche me did not relax the age of the job seeker, relative of the deceased government employee, then it has to be considered that the prescription of age in the recru itment Rules relating to the post to be filled up shall remain. He further urges that the Apex Court in various decisions has decided that the employer of the d eceased government employee cannot wait for years together to provide a job to h is nearest kith and kin, who has not attained majority at the time to death of t he deceased government employee. He further contended that admittedly the present petitioner had not attained maj ority at the time of death of his father, deceased government employee, but he h as not objection if the matter is disposed of by simply giving a direction to th e District Elementary Education Officer, Hailakandi, respondent No. 3, to place the application of the petitioner dated 17th December, 2007 before the District Level Committee constituted by the authority for appointment on compassionate gr ound and also with a direction to the District Level Committee and other State r espondents to consider the case of the petitioner on receipt of the same from th e District Level Committee in terms of the decision passed by this Court in Fazi run Nessa (supra). In view of the above, it is directed that the petitioner shall furnish a copy of the writ petition along with a copy of this order to District Elementary Educat ion Officer, respondent No. 3 who in turn shall refer the case of the petitioner to the District Level Committee, constituted by the authority for consideration of the appointment on compassionate ground and the District Level Committee sha ll consider the case of the petitioner within a period of two months from the da te of receipt of this order and after examining the case of the petitioner in ac cordance with the scheme as well as terms of the decision of this Court in Fazir un Nessa (supra) shall send the matter to the State Level Committee, who after c onsidering the matter in terms of the scheme, as in force today relating to com passionate appointment and in terms of Fazirun Nessa (supra) shall do the needfu l for placing the same before the respondent No. 2, if required, and the final d ecision will be taken by the respondent No. 2 within a period of 15 days from th e date of receipt of the report of the Dy. Commissioner, Hailakandi, respondent No. 4 herein. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of .