AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sathish Ninan, J.
The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the non-consideration of her representations seeking her appointment in the third respondent Corporation under the Compassionate Appointment Scheme.
Sri.Saju Mathew (late), the husband of the petitioner was a Driver in the third respondent Corporation. He passed away on 24.02.2019 while on duty. He died of cardiac arrest that occurred in the course of driving. However, he managed to have the bus halted safely without causing any injury to the passengers. He was the sole earning member of the family which consist of the petitioner and their daughter, his aged parents, and a 47 year old differently abled spinster. The petitioner submitted request for appointment in the Corporation under the Dying-in-harness Scheme. Though the demise of the petitioner's husband was as early as in the year 2019, even as of now, the petitioner's request has not been considered, is the grievance.
The Corporation has filed a counter affidavit. According to the Corporation, the Corporation is running at a heavy loss. The number of existing employees is much in excess than the actual required strength. A meeting was held between the Board and the trade unions and a decision was taken on 04.08.2020 to re-fix the staff strength. A copy of the said decision is produced as Ext.R3(a). At present, the staff strength is in excess which need to be brought down and in the meanwhile, such appointment as sought for by the petitioner cannot be made. Since the year 2018, no appointments have been made in the Corporation under the Dying-in harness/Compassionate Appointment Scheme, the learned Standing Counsel submits. He would also submit that there are similarly placed applicants who had approached the Corporation earlier in point of time and that the petitioner is in the queue.
The learned counsel for the petitioner would, referring to the staff strength stated in Ext.R3(a) contend that, there have been several retirements since Ext.R3(a) which is dated 25.08.2020, and that the claim of the petitioner is liable to be considered.
After considering the rival submissions, without expressing anything on the merits and without prejudice to the rival contentions, the writ petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to consider the petitioner's request for compassionate appointment after affording her an opportunity of hearing. It is for the third respondent to pass appropriate orders having due regard to all relevant inputs.