IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Shekhar B. Saraf, J.
Nimai Chand Parihari & Anr.- Petitioners
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Others – Respondents
W.P.A. 3092 of 2020
Decided On : 04-01-2021
Compassionate Appointment - Public Distribution System - West Bengal Public Distribution System (Maintenance and Control) Orders of 2013 - Notification dated March 7, 2017, memorandum dated January 15, 2020, and new notification dated December 16, 2020 - The court discussed the acts and sections referenced in the judgment, highlighting the changes in the definition of 'family members' and the legislative intent to include the widow of a predeceased son as a family member. The court also emphasized the principles of compassionate appointment and the need to consider the financial hardship faced by the dependents of the deceased.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought the transfer of fair price shop and kerosene oil licenses from petitioner no. 1 to petitioner no. 2 on compassionate grounds. The State rejected the transfer citing the definition of 'family members' in the notification dated March 7, 2017. The petitioners challenged the rejection under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the widow of the predeceased son should be granted compassionate appointment based on the legislative intent reflected in the new notification dated December 16, 2020. The court directed the appropriate authority to grant the license in favor of petitioner no. 2 within six weeks.
Issues: The issues revolved around the rejection of the transfer of licenses based on the definition of 'family members' and the legislative changes in the definition of 'family members' for compassionate appointment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the principles of compassionate appointment, the financial hardship faced by the dependents, and the legislative intent to include the widow of a predeceased son as a family member.
Final Decision: The court directed the appropriate authority to grant the license in favor of petitioner no. 2 within six weeks, ending the controversy and litigation on the subject.
JUDGMENT :
Shekhar B. Saraf, J.
1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioners are aggrieved by the decision of the State Respondents which rejected the transfer of FPS and kerosene oil licenses from the petitioner no. 1 to the petitioner 2 on compassionate grounds; the primary ground of rejection being that the degree of relationship of the petitioner no. 2 is not permissible under the definition of “family members” as stated in the notification dated March 7, 2017, issued under the West Bengal Public Distribution System (Maintenance and Control) Orders of 2013.
2. The facts of this case, in so far as they are material to this writ petition, is circumscribed within a narrow compass and is encapsulated as follows:
b) While FPS and kerosene oil dealership licenses were originally granted to the petitioner no. 1, due to ailments arising out of old age, the petitioner no. 1 furnished a relevant application to the State authorities for the transfer of these licenses to his son, prior to his demise. This application was both considered and accepted by the authorities.
c) However, post such transfer of these licenses in favour of Subhabrata Parihari, the son of the petitioner no. 1, he was murdered by Maoists during an ill-fated incident in the Maoist infested area of the Jungle Mahal region on October 19, 2010. Post the untimely demise of the son of petitioner no. 1 and considering the peculiarity of the circumstances, both licenses were yet again transferred in the name of the petitioner no. 1.
d) For reasons yet again attributable to old-age and multiple illnesses, the petitioner no. 1 made a representation dated January 8, 2018 requesting the Sub-Divisional Controller (F&S), Jhargram (hereinafter referred to as Respondent No. 6) to transfer the aforesaid dealership (comprising licenses for both the fair price shop as well as kerosene oil) in favour of the petitioner no. 2, the only other surviving heir in the family as the daughter of the petitioner no. 1 is married and continues to reside in her matrimonial home. A similar representation seeking such transfer was also filed before the Respondent No.6, by the petitioner no. 2.
e) While no action was initiated on these representations by the State respondents, the petitioner no. 1 filed another follow-up representation dated July 18, 2018 before the District Controller (F&S), Jhargram (hereinafter referred to as Respondent No. 5), seeking the transfer of licenses in favour of petitioner no. 2. Subsequently, the Respondent No. 5 instructed the Respondent No. 6 to proceed with the formalities involved for such transfer while considering it as an exceptional case.
f) While fresh documents were submitted by both petitioners upon instructions received from Respondent No. 6, the Respondent No. 6 directed the Inspector (F&S) to proceed with an enquiry and submit a report on the same. Based on such enquiry, a report was submitted which favourably recommended such transfer of dealership to the petitioner.
g) Despite such a recommendation, no further action was taken by the Respondent No. 5. The petitioner no. 2 was compelled to furnish another representation dated February 14, 2019 before the District Magistrate, Jhargram seeking the transfer of both licenses in her favour on a compassionate basis, in place of petitioner no. 1. Based on such representation, the District Magistrate, Jhargram vide memo dated April 2, 2019 requested the Principal Secretary (F&S Department) to initiate the sought transfer proceedings on compassionate grounds.
h) Subsequently, the petitioners received a memo bearing no. 1917/1(4)/FMR/13-L-51/2014 (Pt-1) dated July 2, 2019 issued by the Deputy Director (License), Directorat
I.G. (Karmik) and Ors. vs. Prahalad Mani Tripathi
The legislative intent to include the widow of a predeceased son as a family member for compassionate appointment and the principles of compassionate appointment based on the financial hardship faced....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the definition of 'family members' in the Control Order, 2013 should be inclusive of the dependents of bachelors/spinsters, especially sibling....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.