Compassionate appointment is not a right; eligibility depends on immediate financial need, procedural compliance, and previous claims exhaust opportunities for other dependants.

JUDGMENT :

ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY, J.

1. The petitioner, Md. Jakirul Islam, has approached this Court seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities, particularly the West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (WBSEDCL), not to give any effect or further effect to the impugned order bearing Memo No. ES & ER-II/Court Case/92 dated 31.10.2018, to set aside the said order, and to consider and grant his appointment under the “die-in-harness” category, condoning the delay, if any, and to forward all requisite papers concerning his service to the competent authority for immediate appointment in accordance with his qualification.

2. The petitioner’s claim emanated from the death of his father, Nurul Islam, who was employed as a Junior Manager under the Pakua Sub-Division of the Chanchal Division, WBSEDCL. The deceased employee, having rendered long, unblemished, and efficient service since his appointment in 1973, expired on 23rd March, 2012, prior to the age of superannuation, being survived by his dependents in severe financial distress. The deceased left behind his widow and eight children, of whom the petitioner was one. The deceased being the sole breadwinner of the family, his untimely death plunged the household into penury.

3. Initially, upon the demise of the said employee, the family collectively resolved the youngest son, Nasirul Islam, would apply for appointment on compassionate ground. Nasirul Islam duly applied, but his candidature was rejected due to discrepancies in his Madhyamik (Rabindra Mukta Vidyalaya) certificate. Upon rejection of the said application, the family members again convened and unanimously decided that the present petitioner, Md. Jakirul Islam, being educationally qualified and having passed the High Madrasah Examination (1999), would apply for employment under the “die-in-harness” scheme. All other legal heirs, including the widow of the deceased, executed no-objection certificates in his favour.

4. The petitioner, thereafter, applied in due form, enclosing requisite documents and certificates, seeking appointment in Group ‘C’ or Group ‘D’ category, as per his eligibility. However, despite submission of his application with all formalities completed, the respondent authorities remained indifferent and silent, failing to take any decisive steps in the matter. Aggrieved by such administrative inaction, the petitioner was constrained to file W.P. No. 17575 (W) of 2016, praying for direction upon WBSEDCL to record his name in the register for compassionate appointments and to provide him employment under the “die-in-harness” category.

5. The said writ petition was heard and disposed of by the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court vide an order dated 24th August, 2018, directing the respondent authority to consider the petitioner’s prayer within eight weeks and to pass a reasoned order after affording him an opportunity of hearing.

6. Pursuant thereto, the General Manager (HR&A), WBSEDCL, summoned the petitioner for a hearing. However, during the said proceeding, the petitioner’s Learned Advocate was not permitted to make any submissions, and the purported “hearing” was conducted in a perfunct