Kishan Kumar Chaukihar vs Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare (Department Of Health Research) Government Of India At New Delhi & Ors.

Om Prakash - VII, Member (J)

Heard Shri Narendra Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Mahendra Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4.

This O.A. has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for the following main relief(s):-

“8.1. The Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to issue an order, commanding the respondent No. 3 to consider and redress the claim the applicant, with regard to his compassionate appointment after attaining the age of majority and consequently an appointment letter may be issued in his favour.

8.2 The Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to issue any other suitable order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case.

8.3 Applicant may kindly be awarded the cost of th e present original application”.

Learned counsel for the applicant, referring to the reliefs clause, submitted that at no stage applicant’s prayer for compassionate appointment has been finally rejected or accepted. He further referred to the counter affidavit and argued that the applicant’s candidature is still under consideration. Accordingly, he prayed that this O.A. may be disposed of with a direction to the competent authority amongst the respondents to consider and decide the applicant’s claim in a time-bound manner.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that there exists a discrepancy in the date of birth as well as the name of the applicant, for which he has been repeatedly advised to furnish the corrected documents. He submitted that the applicant’s candidature is still under consideration and, upon submission of the requisite documents, the same shall be placed before the next CRC meeting for consideration.

I have considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the record.

In these circumstances, I am of the view that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the present O.A. pending. The ends of justice would be met if the respondents are directed to consider and decide the applicant’s claim for compassionate appointment in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the O.A. is disposed of with the direction to the applicant to furnish the requisite documents within a period of two weeks from today. Upon receipt of the documents, the competent authority amongst the respondents shall consider and decide the applicant’s claim for compassionate appointment, strictly in accordance with the applicable rules and guidelines in the next CRC meeting positively. There shall be no order as to costs. All pending M.As. also stand disposed of.