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

2023 Supreme(Gau) 703

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Dulu Dutta, S/o. Lt. HC/Driver Mihir Kumar Dutta - Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India, Rep. by the Secy., Ministry of Home Affairs & Ors. - Respondents
WP(C) No. 2959 of 2011
Decided On : 17-07-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. R. Mazumdar.
For the Respondents: Mr. S. Sarma, Senior Panel Counsel, Central government.

Compassionate appointment should be provided immediately to redeem the family in distress, and it cannot be claimed or offered after a lapse of time and after the crisis is over.

Headnote:

Compassionate Appointment - Eligibility Criteria - Standing Order No.5/2001 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Standing Order No.5/2001 - Summary of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of West Bengal vs. Debabrata Tiwari, reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 219

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought appointment on compassionate grounds after the death of his father, a CRPF employee. The petitioner's application for various posts was repeatedly rejected due to reasons such as lack of vacancies, deficiency in educational qualifications, and height requirements.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment was not justified as there was no evidence of the family being in a penurious state after the father's death. The court also noted that nearly 18 years had passed since the father's death, and the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment was not timely.

Issues: Eligibility for compassionate appointment, delay in claiming compassionate appointment, and the family's financial status after the father's death.

Ratio Decidendi: Compassionate appointment should be provided immediately to redeem the family in distress, and it cannot be claimed or offered after a lapse of time and after the crisis is over. The financial condition of the family at the time of the death of the deceased employee is the primary consideration for compassionate appointment.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, finding no merit in the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. R. Mazumdar, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Sarma, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction upon the respondent authorities to offer appointment to the petitioner either in the rank of Constable Water Carrier or Constable Chaprasi or in any other post for which he would be entitled to as per the Standing Order No.05/2001 and upon his performance during the assessment conducted by the respondents.

3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitioner’s father one Mihir Kumar Dutta died on 16.12.2005 while he was serving as the Head Constable Driver in CRPF. Since the father of the petitioner was the sole earning member of the family, the petitioner applied for appointment in the post of Peon on the ground of compassion. Pursuant thereto on 17.04.2008, the Additional Deputy Inspector General of Police, Group Center, CRPF, Muzaffarpur, Bihar informed the petitioner that his claim for compassionate appointment to the post of Peon was forwarded to the higher up for consideration but was received back with the remark that vacancy of the Peon post was not available in the Department. Under such circumstances, the petitioner was advised to apply in the rank of CT/GD, CT/Trade/Tech and enrolled followers (i.e. Cook, W/C, W/M, S/K, Barber). The petitioner upon receipt of the said communication applied for the other post as mentioned in the communication dated 17.08.2008. Thereupon, vide another communication dated 17.11.2008, it was informed to the petitioner that there was no vacancy in the post of Water Carrier, (Male) under the prescribed quota of 5% of compassionate appointment in the Sector. In the said communication it was mentioned that there was one vacancy in the rank of Cook and S/K. The petitioner was, therefore advised, if he was willing for appointment in the rank of Cook or S/K to submit his consent application to the Office for further needful. The petitioner thereupon again submitted his representation for Cook and S/K. However, on 15.05.2009, vide another communication it was informed that the matter regarding up-gradation of Group ‘D’ employees and grant of its revised pay band is under consideration, and therefore, no recruitment for the post of enrolled followers be conducted by the Sector till finalization of the matter. It was further mentioned that the suitability for the post of Cook could not be assessed. However, suitability could be assessed for the post of CT/GD if he is found eligible in all respect. The petitioner was, therefore, again advised that if he was willing in the rank of CT/GD, he may submit his written consent/willingness application to the Office for doing the needful. The petitioner again submitted his application for CT/GD. Vide another communication dated 12.10.2009, the petitioner was informed that he did not meet eligibility criteria as his height is 162.6 cms tall. The petitioner was again advised that if he was willing, he may apply for various other posts such as Safai Karmachari, Barber, Water Carrier, Washer man and Cook. It further reveals that on 31.10.2009, a communication was issued to the Inspector General of Police, Bihar by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Group Center, CRPF, Guwahati stating inter-alia that the petitioner was asked to report for assessment for the post of Constable General Duty by a letter asking him to report to the Office on 12.10.2009. The petitioner thereupon reported to the Office and during the assessment made by the Board, he could not be recommended since his height was found to be 162.6 cms. It was further mentioned that the petitioner applied for Water Carrier, a Group ‘D’ post. Under such circumstances, the suitability of the petitioner to the post of Water Carrier was assessed from 12.10.2009 to 16.10.2009. During assessment, the petitioner was declared fit for appointment to the post of Water Ca

      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