AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved against the order dated 15.11.2017 (Annex.11) passed by the respondents, wherein it has been held that the petitioner is not entitled for grant of compassionate appointment.
It is, inter-alia, claimed in the writ petition that father of the petitioner was initially appointed as Shiksha Sahyogi in Rajeev Gandhi Swarn Jayanti Pathshala, who died while performing his duty as Shiksha Sahyogi on 26.07.2017.
The petitioner filed an application seeking compassionate appointment under the provisions of the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of Deceased Government Servant Rules, 1996 ('the Rules of 1996'), however, the respondents by their order dated 01.11.2017 indicated that there is no provision for compassionate appointment to dependent of para teachers. Based on which, the application filed by the petitioner has been returned by the Block Elementary Education Officer, Panchayat Samiti Marwar Junction.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that looking to the nature of the Rules, which are for welfare of the dependents of deceased Government servant, action of the respondents in denying appointment to the petitioner is not justified and therefore, the respondents be directed to consider the application of the petitioner.
I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the material available on record.
It is not in dispute that only applicable provisions are the Rules of 1996, which are applicable to the Government servants. As to whether the father of the petitioner can be termed as Government servant, in view of the admitted position that father of the petitioner was working as Shiksha Sahyogi and had not been absorbed in the Government job, it cannot be said that father of the petitioner was a Government servant.
So far as the submission regarding the Rules of 1996 being a welfare legislation is concerned, it is well settled that grant of compassionate appointment is not an alternative mode of employment and a candidate has to fall strictly within the parameters laid in the Rules for seeking appointment on compassionate basis.
In view of the above fact situation, no case for grant of any relief is made out. The writ petition has no substance and the same is, therefore, dismissed.