AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
The petitioner has filed the instant application for the following reliefs:
“A) For issuance of a proper writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the decision of the respondent authorities rejecting petitioners' application seeking compassionate appointment on the ground of "low merit point", as communicated to the petitioner vide letter no. 42568 dated 16.01.2025 issued by Establishment Officer, OTA, Gaya.
B) For issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to bring on record the basis of awarding only 20 points against petitioner's application for compassionate appointment as informed to the petitioner under RTI, in terms of the scheme for compassionate appointment issued by the Ministry of Defense under which point system the petitioner is entitled to a minimum of 35 points.
C) For issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to recalculate the petitioner's merit points in terms of the documents submitted by the petitioner in support of his application for compassionate appointment, strictly in terms of scheme for compassionate appointment issued by the Ministry of Defense (hereinafter referred as the scheme) and consequently command the respondent authorities to appoint the petitioner on compassionate basis as the petitioner is leading a life of great financial hardships and penury.
D) For any other relief(s) that petitioner may be entitled to be found for under the jurisdictions of this Hon'ble Court under the facts and circumstances of this present case.”
The case of the petitioner in brief is that the father of the petitioner who was working on the post of chawkidar in the Indian Armed Forces in the unit of OTA (Officers Training Academy) having died in harness on 24.12.2017, the mother of the petitioner filed an application on 16.2.2018 for processing her claims of family pension etc. On 26.11.2018 the petitioner’s mother filed a representation before the Establishment Authority, OTA, Gaya requesting for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground. As asked for, the petitioner’s mother submitted all the documents for processing the petitioner’s appointment on compassionate ground.
The mother of the petitioner passed away on 5.11.2021.
A letter dated 30.1.2023 was sent by the Establishment Officer, OTA, Gaya to the petitioner stating therein that the application of the petitioner’s mother for his appointment on compassionate ground has been rejected and returned from the Army Headquarters. The petitioner filed another application on 22.2.2023. Finally by letter dated 20.12.2023, the Establishment Officer, OTA, Gaya once again informed him that his application which was sent to the Army Headquarters have been returned as rejected by them.
The petitioner applied once again on 1.1.2024 for his appointment on compassionate ground which was forwarded by the Establishment Officer, OTA, Gaya to the Army Headquarters but as communicated by the OTA, Gaya to the petitioner by their letter dated 16.1.2025, the application was once again returned by the Army Headquarters unsanctioned due to low merit point.
It is the case of the petitioner that on further enquiry, it transpire that as per the ‘Scheme for compassionate appointment - Relative merit points and revised procedure for selection’, the petitioner had secured 20 points. It was vaguely disclosed to the petitioner that having secured low merit points under the said scheme, he had not been appointed.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that he should have been awarded at least 35 points.
It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the merit points awarded to him and the points which should have been awarded have been given in a chart form in paragraph no.10 of the rejoinder to the counter affidavit. The same would show that as against the 22 points awarded, the petitioner should have been given 35 points. As such, it is submitted that the writ application be allowed and in view of the 35 points which the petitioner should have obtained, the respondents be directed to issue an order appointing the petitioner on compassionate ground.
For ready reference, the chart prepared by the petitioner showing the points awarded by the respondents as also the correct points which should have been awarded to the petitioner is reproduced herein below:
| S. No. | Head under the Scheme | Points awarded by respondents (per counter affidavit) | Correct points on admitted facts | Remarks |
| (a) | Basic Family Pension / Monthly amount under NPS | 12 | 20 | See Para 13, Pg 8; Annexure 9, Pg 47 |
| (b) | Lump-sum amount received on death of Govt. servant | 00 | 01 | See Para 25, Pg 12 |
| (c) | Annual income from movable/immovable property and of other members | 00 | 04 | See Para 10, Pg 6; Ax 6, Pg 22 @ Pg 39 |
| (d) | Movable/immovable property of the family (latest market value) | 08 | 08 | Correctly awarded |
| (e) | No. of dependents | 00 | 00 | Correctly awarded |
| (f) | No. of unmarrieddaughters | 00 | 00 | Correctly awarded |
| (g) | No. of minorchildren | 00 | 00 | Correctly awarded |
| (h) | Left-over service | 02 | 02 | Correctly awarded |
| Total | 22 | 35 | Difference of 13 points |
In response, it is submitted by learned counsel for the respondents that there is no error in the points awarded to the petitioner as explained in detail in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents. As such, under the scheme for compassionate appointment, the petitioner would have the liberty to apply afresh and the case of the petitioner would be placed before the next Board for compassionate appointment which would consider the relative merit points of the applicants. It is thus submitted that there being no illegality in the respondents dealing with the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment, the writ application be dismissed.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
The relevant facts in brief are that the father of the petitioner who was working as a chawkidar in the Indian Armed Forces in the unit of the Officers Training Academy at Gaya in Bihar having died in harness on 24.12.2017, the petitioner filed an application for his appointment on compassionate ground, however the petitioner was not appointed on having secured only 22 points.
It may be mentioned here that compassionate appointments are done under the Scheme for compassionate appointment - Relative merit points and revised procedure for selection, a copy of which has been brought on record as Annexure-A/1 to the counter affidavit of the respondents.
The calculation of the merit points is done on a 100 point scale under different heads related to quantum of family pension, terminal benefits, monthly income of family from other sources, movable/immovable property held by the family, number of dependents, number of unmarried daughters, number of minor children and left over service. As per the scheme, compassionate appointment is given to the person who earns the highest score. It thus transpires that the petitioner having secured 20 points only, was not given appointment on compassionate ground.
From the chart reproduced herein above, the dispute which the petitioner raises is the difference in the points awarded to him under the head of (a) Basic Family Pension/Monthly amount under NPS, (b) Lump-sum amount received on death of Government servant and (c) Annual income from movable/immovable property and of other members.
With respect to the basic family pension received, it is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the mother of the petitioner having died on 5.11.2021, the family pension had been discontinued and as such he should be awarded 20 marks under this head.
It may be noted here that the application was filed by the petitioner’s mother for the appointment of petitioner on compassionate ground in November, 2018 and the basic family pension being received by the mother of the petitioner being in the slab of Rs.16,501-19,000, he was correctly given 12 points under this head. At the same time, it is also not in dispute that the mother of the petitioner died on 5.11.2021. After this date, as and when the application of the petitioner is considered, he will be entitled for grant of 20 points under this head.
It is next contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that under the head of lump-sum amount received by the family on death of the Government servant, the petitioner should have been awarded 1 point as against 0 points awarded by the respondents to the petitioner. It is not in dispute that the family of the deceased (father of the petitioner) received a total amount of Rs.29,63,673/- on the death of the petitioner’s father. As such, he was rightly awarded 0 points under this head, the total lump-sum amount having been received by the family on the death of the Government servant being more than Rs. 26,87,501/-.
With respect to the points awarded under the head of annual income from movable/immovable property and of other members, the four sons of the deceased employee including the petitioner herein have been shown to have a total income of Rs.3,60,000/- in the certificate issued by the Circle Office in the year 2019. These certificates which have been brought on record as Annexure-R/7 series to the counter affidavit have not been disputed. In view of these facts, the family income of the deceased employee being Rs.3,60,000/-, the petitioner was rightly awarded 0 points under this head.
In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, so far as the award of points as on the date of the application filed by the petitioner or the application filed by the petitioner’s mother for petitioner’s appointment on compassionate ground is concerned, the Court finds no error in the award of points and no merit in the case of the petitioner.
However, it goes without saying that if the application of the petitioner is considered for his appointment on compassionate ground in accordance with law, so far as the points under the head of basic family pension etc is concerned, the petitioner would be entitled for 20 points, the mother of the petitioner having died in November, 2021. The application of the petitioner would have to be decided in accordance with law as per the relative merit points and revised procedure for selection under the scheme for compassionate appointment brought on record as annexure to the counter affidavit of the respondents.
So far as the instant application is concerned, the Court finds no merit in the same and the application is dismissed.