AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Order
By means of the present Original Application, the applicant prays for the following reliefs:
“ 1. To issue an order or direction to the respondent no.2 to consider the grievances of the applicant for cancelling the undertaking of the applicant dated 7th May 2001 for paying Rs.25% of total monthly salary to the sister in law (Bhabhi) of the applicant and pay month to month full salary to the applicant for which the applicant gave several representations till 3rd February 2014 (annexure no. A-1 to the Original application) and on which basis a forwarding noting letter was sent by the Personnel Officer ( Civilian) C O D Agra to respondent no. 2.
2.To pass such other and further order to direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the present circumstances of the case.
3.Allow the application of the applicant.”
The brief facts of the case are that the brother of the applicant, Surendra Singh, who was working in Central Ordnance Depot, Agra died on 04.07.1990. During 1993, Smt. Kusuma Devi, widow of deceased Surendra Singh, submitted a notarized affidavit surrendering the right of compassionate appointment in favour of the applicant, who is the younger brother of the deceased, on the condition that the applicant shall take care of her as well as her daughter (Annexure A-2). The applicant was appointed on compassionate grounds on 02.04.1994. As financial condition of Smt. Kusuma Devi was not good, the applicant gave an undertaking (Annexure A-3) the relevant portion of which is reproduced below:
“....I hereby undertake to pay 25% of my total salary and allowances as maintenance expenditure on last of each month through cheque/ cash to Smt Kusama Devi till her death and in case of her death, to her daughter till she is married. 25% of my total pay and allowances may please be deducted from my salary each month and paid directly to Smt Kusama Devi each month.” As the applicant was living in a joint family, he was giving his entire salary to Smt. Kusuma Devi. The applicant got married during the year 2001 and started giving his salary to his wife, annoying Smt. Kusama Devi, who took the matter to Court in which the wife of the applicant was finally acquitted on 06.11.2012. The applicant claims that Smt. Kusuma Devi is getting a handsome pension, owns other landed property providing revenue and her daughter got married, so she has limited liabilities. On the other hand, the applicant has children and liabilities to take care of his family. The applicant requested his superior officers to break him free from the undertaking and stop deducting 25% of his salary in favour of Smt. Kusuma Devi and pay his entire salary to him which has been recommended by his superiors to Commandant on 13.02.2014 (Annexure A-10). The decision on the above recommendation is still pending and the applicant prays to allow this O.A. by directing the competent authority to stop the deduction of 25% of his salary for paying it to Smt. Kusuma Devi (Annexure A-1).
Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 in their counter affidavit submitted that Smt. Kusuma Devi, widow of the deceased employee i.e. Surendra Singh, filed an affidavit on 27.7.1993 to AOC Records vide which she surrendered her compassionate appointment in favour of the applicant due to her inability to do field work. The applicant executed an affidavit vide which he gave an undertaking to pay 25% of his total salary and allowances as maintenance expenditure on 02 May 2001 through cheque/cash till her death or to her daughter till she gets married. The declaration of the applicant is irrevocable. Finally, AOC Records issued the appointment order for the post of LDC to the applicant and he joined the duty on 02.04.1994. The applicant was appointed to the post of LDC on compassionate grounds and he has given the undertaking to maintain the family of the deceased. Hence, the request of the applicant to stop the remittance of 25% amount of his total salary to Smt. Kusuma Devi till her lifetime was not acceptable. It is submitted that the criminal case no. 520 of 2004 against Smt. Anita Devi, wife of the applicant, ended in acquittal due to procedural anomalies and that Smt. Kusuma Devi is not financially well off.
Respondent No.4, Smt. Kusuma Devi, in her counter reply has submitted that pursuant to death of her husband Shri Surendra Singh, she had occasion and was entitled to seek compassionate appointment for herself, but Shri Jasbir Singh, the younger brother of Late Surendra Singh, requested her to do the needful to avail him the compassionate appointment and for that sake he shall be regularly maintaining her during her life time and even her minor daughter until her marriage from the salary that he will be getting pursuant to compassionate appointment. The applicant Jasbir Singh was without a job and he fully assured her to maintain her until her death and her minor daughter until the daughter got married from the salary payable to him pursuant to compassionate appointment. Placing reliance upon his assurance, the applicant managed to get her to surrender her claim to compassionate appointment in his favour through the affidavit dated 27.07.1993 in English language as suited the applicant tendered by her to AOC record Secundarabad. (Annexure A-2 of the O.A.). It is stated that Smt. Kusuma Devi is very less educated and English language is quiet alien to her and as such she could not comprehend the tenor of the aforesaid affidavit which was tendered by her only upon the aforesaid assurance/ undertaking of the applicant Jasbir Singh that he shall be paying 25% of his total salary including allowances to the her every month till her death and to her daughter until her marriage. In furtherance of aforesaid assurance/ undertaking, the applicant tendered written undertaking dated 02.05.2001 to the Commandant COD, Agra thereby undertaking to pay 25% of his total salary including allowance every month to Smt. Kusuma Devi till her death and to her daughter until her marriage.
Counsel for respondent No.4 further stated that after his marriage, the applicant Jasbir Singh and his wife Smt. Anita Devi started misbehaving and ill-treating Smt. Kusuma Devi. In connection with the said ill-treatment when the applicant and his wife Smt. Anita Devi beat Smt. Kusuma Devi and snatched away money from her, she made an application U/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. against them and pursuant to said application, Smt. Anita Devi, out of grudge and ill-will, made an application dated 22.07.2004 with incorrect facts and wrong allegations to the Commandant COD, Agra for cancelling the undertaking given by her husband Jasbir Singh to the Commandant. However, due to inability on the part of Smt. Kusuma Devi to prosecute the aforesaid Criminal Case No.520/2004 U/s 323, 504 I.P.C. against the applicant and his wife, the trial could not proceed properly. Consequently, they were acquitted by the learned Magistrate vide its order dated 06.11.2012. He submits that Smt. Kusuma Devi is an elderly lady, suffering from ailments entailing considering amount of expenditure on treatment and maintenance and also has to look after her daughter entailing expenditure thereon at times, as such, given the situation, her financial condition is not sound and she also does not have the property alleged in paragraph No.10 of the O.A. on account of Annexure No. 8 & 9 to the O.A. which are not the genuine documents.The financial condition of the applicant with his salary approximately above Rs.55000/- p.m. is very sound and even in the wake of his honoring the aforesaid undertaking, his imposition to maintain his family can be pulled through smoothly. Therefore, the recommendation dated 03.02.2014 of Personnel Officer (Annexure No.10 to the O.A.) for stopping payment of 25% of his salary to Smt. Kusuma Devi has no justification.
In his rejoinder, the applicant has reiterated the same facts which have been narrated in the O.A. The applicant has also annexed with it a photocopy of the term deposit receipt of Smt. Kusuma Devi for Rs.92,000/- (maturity amount Rs.1,17,342/-), one poster that shows Smt. Kusuma Devi has contested election for Gram Pradhan and land record to show that she owns agricultural land (1.255 Hectare).
Heard the parties and verified the records available in this O.A.
Whoever gets appointment on compassionate ground has to undertake to take care of the family of the deceased. Moreover, the applicant has given a notarized undertaking to pay 25% of his total salary to the widow of the deceased till her death after some time of getting appointed and admittedly he was offering his entire salary to respondent No.4 before he got married. In the criminal case the wife of the applicant was acquitted by giving her the benefit of doubt. On the basis of above discussion, the relief sought by the applicant is not tenable and devoid of merit, hence, the O.A. is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the O.A. is dismissed. No costs.