AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per: Mr. Anindo Majumdar, Administrative Member.
This matter is taken up by the Single Bench for disposal in accordance with the order of the Hon’ble Chairman, CAT dated 10/09/2021 issued under Sub-Section (6) of Section 5 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, and since no complicated question of law is involved.
The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985, praying for the following relief(s):-
“a) To quash and/or set aside the impugned speaking order dated 6.10.2023 passed by the respondent authorities, rejecting the claim of compassionate appointment of the applicant.
b)To pass an order directing the respondent authorities to grant compassionate appointment to the applicant in terms of DOPT OM dated 9.10.1998 modified on 16.1.2013.
c)To direct the respondent authorities to show cause for taking untrue fact in the impugned speaking order dated 6.10.2023.
d)An order directing the official respondents to produce/cause production of all relevant records.
e)Any other order or further order/orders as to this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper."
3. Brief facts of the case:-
The applicant’s father, Late Munshi Mochi, who was working as a Garden Attendant at the Acharya Jagadish Chandra Bose, Indian Botanic Garden (AJCBIBG) under the Botanical Survey of India (BSI), expired while on duty on 27.10.2008.
Following the death of the sole breadwinner, the applicant submitted an application to the respondent authority seeking compassionate appointment. The case was forwarded by the Head of Office to the Director, BSI, vide letters dated 20.04.2015 and 30.09.2015.
A committee was re-constituted on 23.11.2015 to assess the financial condition of the applicants. Pursuant to physical verification, an enquiry report was submitted on 04.06.2018 confirming that the applicant was living under extreme indigent conditions with minimal financial means.
The applicant had earlier approached this Tribunal by filing an O.A./350/0455/2021 which was disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 14.07.2021 with directions upon the respondents to consider his representation and to pass a reasoned and speaking order. Pursuant to the aforesaid order of this Tribunal, Respondent no. 6 had passed an order dated 11.10.2021, stating that due to a limited availability of quota compassionate appointment (yielding approximately 1 vacancy for the recruitment year 2021) and the existence of a waitlist/queue of nearly 95 applicants across India, the claim of the applicant could not be considered immediately but would be considered in turn.
Aggrieved by the order dated 11.10.2021, the applicant had preferred an Original Application being O.A./350/0956/2022. This Tribunal, vide its order dated 21.06.2023 had quashed the order dated 11.10.2021in light of the indigent report and had rejected the competent authority to take a holistic view of the matter based on the policy prevalent at the time of death of the father of the applicant and had issued appropriate orders.
In compliance with the Tribunal’s directions, the respondents passed the impugned Speaking Order dated 06.10.2023, rejecting the applicant’s claim solely on the ground that the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) had imposed a ban on compassionate appointments in BSI and had not accepted to lift the same.
Hearing.
I have heard Ld. Counsel for both sides and considered the material on record.
The submission made by the Ld. Counsel for the applicant are summarised below:-
The ground of “ban on compassionate appointment” taken in the impugned order dated 06.10.2023 is contrary to the established policy of the Government of India on the issue of appointment on compassionate ground.
Ld. Counsel for the applicant drew attention to the answer dated 05.02.2014 given by the Hon’ble Minister of the State in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pension in response to an unstated question in the Lok Sabha (Annexure A-14) wherein it has been directed that the Scheme of Compassionate Appointments issued by the Department of Personnel & Training, vide OM dated 09.10.1998/ 16.09.2013 is in operation.
Ld. Counsel for the applicant further submitted that the physical verification report dated 04.06.2018 has explicitly established the indigent condition of the applicant’s family, and that as per RTI information dated 23.01.2024, direct recruitment vacancies exist in Level-1 posts.
Ld. Counsel for the respondents submits that while the applicant’s case was processed and forwarded to the Ministry, the said Ministry (MoEF&CC) has informed that there is a moratorium/ban on filled posts under the compassionate appointment quota in BSI.
Since the ban has not been lifted by the Ministry, the Field Office/ Head of Office expressed inability to issue an offer of appointment at this stage.
Findings.
I have carefully examined the pleadings, the impugned order dated 06.10.2023 the earlier orders of this Tribunal dated 14.07.2021 and 21.06.2023, as well as the Physical Verification Report dated 04.06.2018 placed on record.
It is a settled position of law that compassionate appointment is intended to provide immediate relief to the family of a deceased government servant to tide over the financial crisis faced by the family after the loss of the sole breadwinner.
In the previous round of litigation in O.A. No. 958/2022 (decided on 21.06.2023), this Bench had quashed the earlier order dated 11.10.2021 and directed the respondents to take a holistic decision on the prayer of the applicant considering the physical verification report wherein the penury of the applicant was confirmed.
The sole reason furnished by the respondents in the impugned order dated 06.10.2023 is an administrative “ban” on compassionate appointments imposed by MoEF&CC. However, the respondents have not placed any material on record in support of their contention in the regard. Further, the Department of Personnel & Training have not issued any order it’s policy for keeping on compassionate grounds as per its OM dated 09.10.1998/16.01.2013 in abeyance.
The blanket rejection of the case of the applicant without placing it before a properly constituted Circle Selection Committee/ Screening Committee to evaluate the applications received for appointment on compassionate ground is not proper.
In view of the above discussion, the Original Application the impugned Speaking Order dated 06.10.2023 passed by Respondent No. 5 is hereby quashed and set aside.
The matter is remanded back to the respondent with the following directions:
Respondent No. 1 (Secretary, MoEF&CC) and Respondent No. 3 (Director, BSI) are directed to reconsider the case of the applicant for compassionate appointment in accordance with the extant guidelines on the subject issued by the Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India.
The case of the applicant shall be placed before the next meeting of the Committee for Compassionate Appointment. The said committee will make its recommendation based on the comparative merit and indigent condition of the applicant and the available vacancies.
The entire exercise shall be completed and a fresh reasoned speaking order will be passed by the competent respondent authority and communicated to the applicant, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
The Original Application (O.A. No. 350/00995/2024) is accordingly disposed of to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs.