AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER HON’BLE MR. PANKAJ KUMAR, MEMBER (A)
In this case relating to the compassionate appointment, the applicant has sought the following reliefs:
a)To quash the impugned orders dated 01.01.2024 and order dated 16.10.2018 (communicated vide letter dated 23.10.2018) contained as Annexure No.A-1 & A-1A to this OA, with all consequential benefits.
b)To consider the case of the applicant for compassionate appointment on the basis of the fact existing and in the light of the ratio laid down in the matter of Mukesh Kumar and Ramesh Kumar Pal.
c)Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit, just and proper under the circumstances of the case, may also be passed.
d)Cost of the present case.
The facts of the case are that the applicant’s mother, who was working on the post of MTS under the respondents, died in harness on 25.01.2014, leaving behind her husband, two daughters and two sons, including the applicant. The applicant represented on 29.12.2014 to the respondents for appointment on compassionate ground, but his case was not recommended by the Circle Relaxation Committee (CRC) and it was rejected by the respondents vide letter dated 12.01.2017. The applicant approached this Tribunal in OA No. 126 of 2018 whereupon this Tribunal, vide order dated 02.05.2018, directed the respondents to reconsider the claim of the applicant. The respondents, vide letter dated 16.10.2018, rejected the applicant’s claim for compassionate appointment. Thereafter, the applicant filed OA No. 3 of 2019 whereupon this Tribunal, vide order dated 06.10.2023, directed the respondents consider and decide the applicant’s representation dated 27.08.2023. The respondents, vide letter dated 01.01.2024, rejected the applicant’s representation for appointment on compassionate ground. Aggrieved, the applicant has preferred this OA.
The applicant’s contention is that the respondents have rejected his claim for appointment on compassionate ground without application of mind as no fresh enquiry has been conducted by the respondents’ Welfare Inspector and the indigent condition of his family has not been taken into consideration.
The respondents state that the applicant’s case for appointment on compassionate ground was considered by CRC along with other cases on 27.12.2017, 28.12.2017 and 05.01.2018 considering the prescribed parameters (family pension, retirement benefits, monthly income of the family, moveable and immoveable property, number of dependents, unmarried daughters, number of minor children and remaining period of the deceased official), but it could not be recommended as the applicant obtained only 48 merit points while the last recommended candidate had 57 merit points. It is contended that the applicant’s case was considered again by CRC on 27.09.2018 and 28.09.2018 and it was observed that in view of the fact that the family of the deceased official has been able to mange all these years since 2014, the need for immediate assistance is not justified. It is further contended that the applicant’s representation has been decided vide order dated 01.01.2024 wherein it is mentioned that the last recommended candidate on the basis of CRC’s meetings on 27-28.09.2018 had 53 merit points, but the applicant’s case had lower merit.
Heard both the parties.
It is noted that consolidated guidelines on scheme for compassionate appointments have been brought out by the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT), Government of India vide office memorandum dated 02.08.2022. The object of the scheme is to grant appointment on compassionate grounds to a dependent family member of a Government servant dying in harness or who is retired on medical grounds, thereby leaving his family in penury and without any means of livelihood, to relieve the family of the Government servant concerned from financial destitution and to help it get over the emergency [Paragraph 1 of DOPT O.M. No. 14014/6/94-Estt. (D) dated 09.10.1998]. Compassionate appointments can be made upto a maximum of 5% of vacancies falling under direct recruitment quota in any Group ‘C’ post.
It is further noted that prescription of time limit for considering applications for compassionate appointment has been reviewed by DoPt vide O.M No.14014/3/2011Estt.(D) dated 26.07.2012 in view of the Hon’ble High Court Allahabad judgment dated 07.05.2010 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 13102 of 2010. Subject to availability of a vacancy and instructions on the subject issued by DoPT from time to time, any application for compassionate appointment is to be considered without any time limit and decision taken on merit in each case. Paragraphs 3 & 4 of OM dated 26.07.2012 are extracted below:
“3.Subsequently vide this Department’s O.M. No. 14014/19/2002-Estt (D) dated 5th May, 2003 a time limit of three years was prescribed for considering cases of compassionate appointment. Keeping in view the Hon’ble High Court Allahabad judgment dated 07.05.2010 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 13102 of 2010, the issue has been re-examined in consultation with Ministry of Law. It has been decided to withdraw the instructions contained in the O.M. dated 05.05.2003.
4.The cases of compassionate appointment may be regulated in terms of instructions issued vide O.M. dated 09.10.1988 as amended from time to time. The onus of examining the penurious condition of the dependent family will rest with the authority making compassionate appointment.”
(emphasis supplied)
Having taken note of the scheme for compassionate appointment under the Central Government, it is observed that the condition of deceased employee’s family may undergo change with time. The field comprising candidates applying for consideration for compassionate appointment may also change over time. The vacancies available against the quota of 5% of direct recruitment vacancies each year may vary. These factors may diminish or brighten the prospects of a candidate for compassionate appointment.
It is noted that the case of the applicant has been considered on merits by CRC only twice. It cannot be said that the applicant has not been diligently pursuing his case. It would be unjust to shut the door on a family praying for consideration of their case without examining afresh the relative merit of the applicant’s claim by the respondents.
In view of the foregoing, the impugned order dated 01.01.2024 is quashed and set aside and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the applicant afresh on merits through the Circle Relaxation Committee and decide his case by way of a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It is made clear that no observation is made on the merits of the applicant’s case. This OA is disposed of accordingly.
Associated MAs also stand disposed of.
Parties shall bear their own costs.