AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per: Mr. Anindo Majumdar, Administrative Member.
This matter is taken up by the Single Bench for disposal in accordance with the order of the Hon’ble Chairman, CAT dated 10/09/2021 issued under Sub-Section (6) of Section 5 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, and since no complicated question of law is involved.
The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985, praying for the following relief(s):-
“a) To quash and/or set aside the impugned speaking order dated 6.10.2023 passed by the respondent authorities, rejecting the claim of compassionate appointment of the applicant.
b)To pass an order directing the respondent authorities to grant compassionate appointment to the applicant in terms of DOPT OM dated 9.10.1998 modified on 16.1.2013.
c)To direct the respondent authorities to show cause for taking untrue fact in the impugned speaking order dated 6.10.2023.
d)An order directing the official respondents to produce/cause production of all relevant records.
e)Any other order or further order/orders as to this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper."
3. Brief facts of the case:-
The applicant’s father, late Sekhar Nayek, had expired while in service on 27.10.2008. The applicant had submitted an application seeking compassionate appointment on 08.09.2003.
The matter remained pending with the respondent authorities for over a decade. A committee to assess the financial condition of the applicant was eventually reconstituted on 23.11.2015. The assessment report prepared by the said committee categorically recorded that the applicant was living in penury with no regular source of income.
The applicant’s prayer was initially rejected vide order dated 11.10.2021 on the ground of “lack of vacancies for the year 2021”.
Aggrieved with the rejection of his representation, the applicant approached this Tribunal in O.A./350/0957/2022 which was disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 21.06.2023 whereby the rejection order dated 11.10.2021 was set aside and respondents were directed to re-consider the case of the applicant in accordance with law.
Upon re-consideration, the respondents had thereafter again rejected the claim of the applicant. While regarding the claim of the applicant, the respondents had cited a ban on compassionate appointments in force and the existence of a long list of applicants for compassionate appointment as reasons for rejection of the claim of the applicant.
Hearing.
I have heard Ld. Counsel for both sides and considered the material on record.
The submission made by the Ld. Counsel for the applicant are summarised below:-
The ground of “ban on compassionate appointment” taken in the impugned order dated 06.10.2023 is contrary to the established policy of the Government of India on the issue of appointment on compassionate ground.
Ld. Counsel for the applicant drew attention to the answer dated 05.02.2014 given by the Hon’ble Minister of the State in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pension in response to an unstated question in the Lok Sabha (Annexure A-14) wherein it has been directed that the Scheme of Compassionate Appointments issued by the Department of Personnel & Training, vide OM dated 09.10.1998/ 16.09.2013 is in operation.
Ld. Counsel for the applicant further submitted that the physical verification report dated 04.06.2018 has explicitly established the indigent condition of the applicant’s family, and that as per RTI information dated 23.01.2024, direct recruitment vacancies exist in Level-1 posts.
Ld. Counsel for the respondents submits that while the applicant’s case was processed and forwarded to the Ministry, the said Ministry (MoEF&CC) has informed that there is a moratorium/ban on filled posts under the compassionate appointment quota in BSI. Since the ban has not been lifted by the Ministry, the Field Office/ Head of Office expressed inability to issue an offer of appointment at this stage.
Findings
I have carefully examined the pleadings, the impugned order dated 06.10.2023 the earlier orders of this Tribunal dated 14.07.2021 and 21.06.2023, as well as the Physical Verification Report dated 04.06.2018 placed on record.
It is a settled position of law that compassionate appointment is intended to provide immediate relief to the family of a deceased government servant to tide over the financial crisis faced by the family after the loss of the sole breadwinner.
In the previous round of litigation in O.A. No. 958/2022 (decided on 21.06.2023), this Bench had quashed the earlier order dated 11.10.2021 and directed the respondents to take a holistic decision on the prayer of the applicant considering the physical verification report wherein the penury of the applicant was confirmed.
The sole reason furnished by the respondents in the impugned order dated 06.10.2023 is an administrative “ban” on compassionate appointments imposed by MoEF&CC. However, the respondents have not placed any material on record in support of their contention in the regard. Further, the Department of Personnel & Training have not issued any order it’s policy for keeping on compassionate grounds as per its OM dated 09.10.1998/16.01.2013 in abeyance.
The blanket rejection of the case of the applicant without placing it before a properly constituted Circle Selection Committee/ Screening Committee to evaluate the applications received for appointment on compassionate ground is not proper.
In view of the above discussion, the Original Application the impugned Speaking Order dated 06.10.2023 passed by Respondent No. 5 is hereby quashed and set aside.
The matter is remanded back to the respondent with the following directions:
Respondent No. 1 (Secretary, MoEF&CC) and Respondent No. 3 (Director, BSI) are directed to reconsider the case of the applicant for compassionate appointment in accordance with the extant guidelines on the subject issued by the Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India.
The case of the applicant shall be placed before the next meeting of the Committee for Compassionate Appointment. The said committee will make its recommendation based on the comparative merit and indigent condition of the applicant and the available vacancies.
The entire exercise shall be completed and a fresh reasoned speaking order will be passed by the competent respondent authority and communicated to the applicant, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
The Original Application (O.A. No. 350/00994/2024) is accordingly disposed of to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs.