SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(SC) 850

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DR. B.S. CHAUHAN & JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, JJ.
CHIEF COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, LUCKNOW & ORS. - Appellants
VERSUS
PRABHAT SINGH - Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 8635 of 2012 (Arising out Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 25985 of 2012)
Decided on : 30-11-2012

Headnote:

Constitution Of India, 1950 - Claim of appointment - Appointment on compassionate - Central Excise and Customs Department and was posted in Customs Division Varanasi died in harness applied for appointment on compassionate ground - It seems that he could not be appointed as such because there was no vacancy available accommodate him - His application therefore remained pending - Having waited long enough filed Original Application before Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad Bench Allahabad hereinafter referred to as CAT-Allahabad Bench - In his Original Application Singh prayed for a direction to respondents appoint him on compassionate grounds since his father Vijay Bahadur Singh had died in harness. The CAT-Allahabad Bench disposed of application filed by Prabhat Singh with a direction to Commissioner Central Excise Allahabad to take decision on representation filed seeking appointment on compassionate ground within three months –Held, Court or Tribunals applied their mind to aforesaid pre-condition for eligibility for appointment on compassionate ground none of the directions issued by High Court or Tribunals would have been issued - Such directions could have been issued only when the party approaching Tribunal or the High Court had established a prima facie case by demonstrating fulfillment of terms and conditions stipulated in rules/regulations/policy instructions/office memoranda relevant for such consideration - Had aforesaid simple exercise been carried out it would not have been necessary to examine matter again and again - In instant caseCourts and Tribunals should not fall prey to any sympathy syndrome as issue directions for compassionate appointments, without reference to prescribed norms - Courts are not supposed carry Santa Claus’s big bag on Christmas disburse the gift of compassionate appointment to all those who seek a court’s intervention - Courts and Tribunals must understand that every such act of sympathy compassion and discretion wherein directions are issued for appointment on compassionate ground could deprive really needy family requiring financial support and thereby push into penury truly indigent destitute and impoverish family - Discretion is therefore ruled out - So are misplaced sympathy and compassion – Appeal allowed

ORDER

Jagdish Singh Khehar, J.-Leave granted.

2. Vijay Bahadur Singh, who was working as a sepoy in the Central Excise and Customs Department and was posted in the Customs Division at Varanasi, died in harness on 2.3.1996. His son Prabhat Singh applied for appointment on compassionate ground. It seems, that he could not be appointed as such, because there was no vacancy available to accommodate him. His application therefore remained pending.

3. Having waited long enough, Prabhat Singh filed Original Application no. 1459 of 2005 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the “CAT-Allahabad Bench”). In his Original Application, Prabhat Singh prayed for a direction to the respondents to appoint him on compassionate grounds, since his father Vijay Bahadur Singh had died in harness. The CAT-Allahabad Bench disposed of the application filed by Prabhat Singh on 8.12.2005 with a direction to the Commissioner, Central Excise, Allahabad to take a decision on the representation filed by Prabhat Singh seeking appointment on compassionate ground within three months.

4. In compliance with the directions issued by the CAT-Allahabad Bench dated 8.12.2005, the Commissioner, Central Excise, Allahabad, adjudicated upon the claim of Prabhat Singh (for appointment on compassionate ground), by an order dated 5.1.2006. A perusal of the aforesaid order inter alia reveals, that the policy instructions pertaining to appointment on compassionate ground envisage, that such appointments can be made only up to a maximum of 5% vacancies, arising under the direct recruitment quota (in any group “C” or group “D” posts). It also emerges from the order dated 5.1.2006, that the Ministry of Finance, vide its letter dated 19.7.2001, restrained the authorities from, filling up any vacancies by way of direct recruitment. In compliance therewith, the department had not made any appointment by way of direct recruitment since December, 2000. Accordingly, in the absence of appointment against direct recruitment vacancies, no compassionate appointment could have been made. This therefore constituted one of the reasons for not appointing Prabhat Singh on compassionate ground. The order passed by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Allahabad further reveals, that the erstwhile cadres of Lower Divisional Clerks and Upper Divisional Clerks had been abolished. The existing Lower Divisional Clerks and Upper Divisional Clerks were merged into a newly created cadre of Tax Assistants. In so far as the post of Tax Assistant is concerned, the minimum prescribed qualification, for appointment by way of direct recruitment thereto, was graduation. Prabhat Singh could not be appointed on compassionate ground, against the post of Tax Assistant as he possessed the qualification of intermediate, which is lower than the minimum prescribed qualification. For the reasons summarized hereinabove, the claim of Prabhat Singh for appointment on compassionate ground was rejected by the order of the Commissioner, Central Excise, Allahabad dated 5.1.2006.

5. Dissatisfied with the order dated 5.1.2006, Prabhat Singh approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as “the CAT- Lucknow Bench”), by filing Original Application no.468 of 2006. The instant Original Application filed by Prabhat Singh was disposed of by CAT-Lucknow Bench by an order dated 14.03.2008, with the direction, that the claim of Prabhat Singh for appointment on compassionate ground be re-considered against the post of Tax Assistant. While issuing the aforesaid direction, it was clarified, that the earlier order dated 5.1.2006 would not be taken into consideration, to the detriment of the applicant-Prabhat Singh.

6. In compliance with the directions issued by the CAT-Lucknow Bench dated 14.3.2008, the Additional Commissioner, (P&V), Central Excise, Allahabad, re-considered the claim of Prabhat Singh for appointment on compassion















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top