Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.50 seconds)
Hafizur Rahman vs The State Of Assam And 4 Ors on 10 December, 2021 cites

Achyut Das vs State Of Assam on 29 October, 1993

Fourthly, it is not in dispute that as per ratio laid down in the case of Achyut Ranjan Das (supra), as on 09.08.2019, when DLC had held its meeting more than two years from the date of application had lapsed. Fifthly, now the O.M. No. ABP.50/ 2006/ Pt/182 dated 01.06.2015, for compassionate appointment is in force and under the said OM, the 5% vacancy is required to be considered on cadre strength and not number of vacancies available.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 108 - G N Ray - Full Document

N.C. Santhosh vs The State Of Karnataka on 4 March, 2020

7) Therefore, in light of the herein before case of N.C. Santhosh (supra), and under the OM dated 01.06.2015 for compassionate appointment in force in the State of Assam, the petitioner was ineligible to be appointed on compassionate ground. Accordingly, notwithstanding that the DLC ought not to have taken up the already rejected case of the petitioner, when challenge to the previous DLC minutes 09.01.2015 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 19.09.2016, yet on merit, the decision taken in the DLC meeting held on 09.08.2019 warrants no interference.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 450 - H Roy - Full Document

Pankaj Kumar Mahato vs The State Of Assam & 3 Ors on 2 August, 2017

5) The said argument, though appearing to be attractive, cannot be accepted under any view of the matter. Firstly, in the case of Pankaj Kumar Mahato (supra), the Court was not considering 5% vacancy position of 2014-15 for Nagaon district, available for compassionate appointment. Secondly, there is Page No.# 5/7 no material to demonstrate that on 09.08.2019, when the DLC had held its meeting, vacancy for the year 2014-15 was available. Thirdly, it is not in dispute that the order dated 19.09.2016, dismissing the writ petition, i.e. W.P.(C) 4980/2016, filed by the petitioner for seeking compassionate appointment has attained finality as such the present writ petition is held to be barred by principles of res judicata as well as issue estoppel.
Gauhati High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 2 - A K Goswami - Full Document

Jagdish Sahu And Anr vs State Of Chhattisgarh 49 ... on 15 January, 2018

In the most recent judgment in State of Himachal Pradesh & Page No.# 6/7 Anr. vs. Shashi Kumar, (2019) 3 SCC 653 the earlier decisions governing the principles of compassionate appointment were discussed and analysed. Speaking for the bench, Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud reiterated that appointment to any public post in the service of the State has to be made on the basis of principles in accord with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and compassionate appointment is an exception to the general rule. The Dependent of a deceased government employee are made eligible by virtue of the policy on compassionate appointment and they must fulfill the norms laid down by the State's policy.
Chattisgarh High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 3 - R C Samant - Full Document
1