Kamini Tiwari vs State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi And Ors

V. Ajay Kumar, J

The applicant is the daughter of Shri Nand Kishor Tiwari, Ex- Sub Officer of Delhi Fire Service, Government of NCT of Delhi. As the said Nand Kisore Tiwari, died in harness, the applicant was appointed, on compassionate grounds, as Matron, vide Annexure A-2 proceedings dated 24.08.2012. Accordingly, after accepting the terms of appointment, the applicant joined as Matron. While the applicant was working as such, she was transferred from CPRO-03 to CJ-06, vide the Annexure A-1 transfer order dated 02.09.2014.

Seeking setting aside of her appointment order, vide Annexure A-2 dated 24.08.2012 and the transfer order, vide Annexure A-1 dated 02.09.2014, the applicant filed the instant OA.

Heard Shri J.A. Chaudhary, learned counsel for the applicant and none for the respondents and perused the pleadings on record.

Shri J.A. Chaudhary, learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the father of the applicant died in harness while working as Ex-Sub Officer, a Group 'C' post and that the applicant was also fully qualified and eligible to be appointed on compassionate grounds, in any Group 'C' post, but the respondents illegally and arbitrarily appointed the applicant in a Group 'D' post, i.e., Matron. Accordingly, she prayed for setting aside her appointment order dated 24.08.2012 with a consequential direction to appoint her in any Group 'C' post with effect from 24.08.2012.

The applicant having accepted the terms and conditions of appointment as Matron, way back in 2012, and having joined in the said post, filed the instant OA after 2 years of her working as Matron, which is impermissible.

Firstly, the OA itself is barred by limitation as the cause of action for appointment in a Group 'C' post, on compassionate grounds arose when the respondents appointed her in a Group 'D' post on 24.08.2012. Hence, the OA is barred by the period of limitation.

Secondly, once the applicant accepted the offer of appointment for the post of Matron and joined as such, now cannot contend that her appointment itself, as Matron, is illegal (See-I.G. Karmik & Others Vs. Prahalad Mani Tripathi-(2007) 2 SCC (L&S) 417).

In the circumstances and for the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any merit in the OA and accordingly the same is dismissed. No costs.