Smt. Archana Paswan vs Union Of India & Ors.

The applicant has filed the O.A under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, seeking the relief to quash the impugned order dated 11/19.07.2019 passed by respondent No. 2 and also to direct the respondents to grant her the compassionate appointment after the death of her husband.

It is the case of applicant that the applicant’s husband Late Ashok Kumar Paswan got the job of Village Postal Servant/Postal Distributor MANISH under dying in harness rules in place of his father who died on 01.09.2007. However, husband of the applicant was also died on 15.09.2016. The applicant is a Graduate and has also obtained the certificate in Computer Education. The applicant has submitted the synopsis form in the year 2017 to Circle Office, Lucknow through Regional Office, Gorakhpur. However, the request of applicant was not acceded to by the Circle Relaxation Committee and her case was not recommended to by the aforesaid Committee. The applicant has moved an application under Section-5 of the Right to Information Act seeking the information from the respondent No. 3, asking seven questions through the application. The main question asked by the applicant was question No. 4 that on what ground the appointment to the applicant under dying in harness rules has been rejected. However, the respondent No. 3 has not given the answer for the relevant question No. 4 and has said that that the question No. 4 relates to the office of respondent No. 2. Only question No. 1 and 2 have been answered and rest of the questions have not been answered. Aggrieved with the action of respondents, the applicant has filed the present O.A.

The respondents have filed the counter reply stating therein that the husband of applicant got the job in place of his father under dying in harness rules. After the death of her husband, the applicant has applied for the job under dying in harness rules. However, her case was not recommended vide impugned order dated 11/19.07.2019 on the ground that as per Directorate letter No. 17-02/2018-GDS dated 08.03.2019, she has not fulfilled the eligibility criteria. From the aforesaid letter, it is clear that the candidate who applied for job under dying in harness rules has to pass the Mathematics and English in 10^th standard. However, the applicant has not taken the aforesaid subjects in the High School examination. Hence, her candidature for compassionate appointment was not recommended by the Circle Relaxation Committee. In this regard, a letter dated 25.06.2019 was written by the Assistant Director MEHROTRA (Recruitment) to the Senior Superintendents of Post Offices, Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur and thereafter in pursuance of the aforesaid letter, impugned order was passed by the respondents. With the above facts and documents annexed with the counter affidavit, the respondents have prayed for dismissal of the O.A.

The applicant has filed the rejoinder affidavit reiterating the facts stated in the O.A. However, she has been facing undue hardship due to the death of sole bread earner of the family and she has prayed to direct the respondents to provide her an appointment under dying in harness on a suitable post for which she may be found eligible.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings on record.

Through the present O.A., the applicant has sought to quash the impugned order dated 11/19.07.2019 passed by respondent No. 2 and also to direct the respondents to grant her the compassionate appointment after the death of her husband. The applicant is a graduate and also having the certificate of computer education. However, the Circle Relaxation Committee of the respondents’ department has not recommended her case in pursuance of Directorate letter No. 17-02/2018-GDS dated 08.03.2019. The respondents have mentioned in their counter affidavit that the applicant has not fulfilled the eligibility criteria for the job on which her husband had been working as she has not passed the High School examination with Mathematics and English.

After perusal of pleadings and documents available in the O.A., it transpires that the letter dated 08.03.2019 on which the respondents are relying is a general rule for recruitment on the post of Gramin Dak Sevaks. In the aforesaid letter, there is nothing about the appointment under dying in harness rules. The case of the applicant has to be considered by the Circle Relaxation Committee under dying in harness MANISH rules of the respondents’ department. The applicant has not applied for the job of Gramin Dak Sevak as a fresh candidate. She has been requesting to provide the job under dying in harness rules. The guidelines of dying in harness rules might be different. The object of compassionate appointment is to enable the family of the deceased employee to tide over the sudden crisis and grant the relief to bereaved family. The applicant was only 28 years of age at the time of filing of the O.A. Her survival for rest of the life, which is very long, is tough. The applicant has also relied upon the Judgments of the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad, which are as under: -

In all the aforesaid Judgments, the Hon’ble Court has directed the respondents’ authority to consider the case of applicant who applied for a job under dying in harness rules, and give employment on a suitable post for which he/she is eligible.

The respondents have to consider the case of applicant under dying in harness rules and not under the general rules for the post of GDS. If, the respondents have found that the applicant is not suitable for the post, she applied for in place of her husband, the respondents may consider her candidature for another job to which the applicant is eligible. The order dated 25.06.2019 and the impugned order dated 11.07.2019 are not the speaking order. The respondents have not considered the merits or demerits of the case of applicant. Only relying upon the Directorate letter No. 17-02/2018-GDS dated 08.03.2019, they have passed the orders not recommending the case of applicant for compassionate appointment.

In view of the above discussions and after perusal of aforesaid MANISH Judgments of the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad, the O.A. is allowed and the order dated 25.06.2019 and impugned order dated 11/19.07.2019 are quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the applicant under their prevailing dying in harness rules. If, the respondents have found that the applicant is not suitable for the post, she applied for in place of her husband, the respondents may consider her candidature for another job to which the applicant is eligible having the good academic qualification. The case of the applicant will be considered within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The order must be a reasoned and speaking order. The result of the consideration shall be communicated to the applicant forthwith. There will be no order as to costs. All the pending MAs shall be deemed to have been disposed of. Registry is directed to do the needful.