ORDER :

1. The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner Smt. Seema being aggrieved of the order dated 11.02.2022 passed by learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench rejecting the original application filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondent Postal Department for affording appointment to the petitioner on compassionate basis to a suitable post in place of her father, an erstwhile employee of the Department.

2. The petitioner is the married daughter of Late Shri Rakha Ram Mali who was employed in the Postal Department as an Ex. Mail Overseer. He expired on 02.04.2012 while in service. The application seeking compassionate appointment filed by Shri Prakash Chand, Son of Shri Rakha Ram and brother of the petitioner was rejected by the respondents vide endorsement dated 27.06.2013. Another such application filed by Shri Prakash Chand was rejected on 25.09.2013. Shri Prakash Chand filed an Original Application No.113/2014 in the Central Administrative Tribunal for assailing these orders which was dismissed by order dated 21.11.2016 which has attained finality as the same was not challenged further. The petitioner herein, filed the application dated 01.01.2019 and representation dated 04.02.2019 before the employer of her late father, seeking compassionate appointment. However, the respondent Department did not decide the application and did not afford appointment to the petitioner on compassionate basis, whereupon, she filed an original application in the Central Administrative Tribunal which was opposed by the respondents on numerous grounds viz. that the application filed by the petitioner amounted to a second prayer for compassionate appointment because, the earlier prayer made to this effect by her brother Prakash Chand had been rejected twice; that the petitioner was married and was living with her husband at the Village Chak Bhainsaka Tehsil Shiv, District Barmer and that she was neither a dependent of Rakha Ram nor the family of Rakha Ram was dependent on her. The learned tribunal considered the submissions advanced by counsel representing the parties and rejected the application seeking compassionate appointment preferred by the petitioner by the order dated 11.02.2022 which is assailed in this writ petition.

3. Dr. Nupur Bhati, learned counsel representing the petitioner, vehemently and fervently submitted that the view taken by the Tribunal while rejecting the prayer for compassionate appointment made by the petitioner in place of her late father is absolutely unjust, illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner was unquestionably dependent on her father. Dismissal of the application preferred by the petitioner’s brother for compassionate appointment had been turned down, cannot be considered to be a precedent against the petitioner from seeking compassionate appointment because she has an independent legal right to make such a claim in the capacity of married daughter of the deceased government employee. She placed reliance on the following Supreme Court judgments:-

1. Govind Prakash Verma vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India reported in 2005 (10) SCC 289 &

2. Canara Bank and Anr. vs. M. Mahesh Kumar reported in 2015 (7) SCC 412

& implored the Court to accept the writ petition, set aside the impugned order dated 11.02.2022 and direct the respondents to offer compassionate appointment to the petitioner on a suitable post in the respondent postal department in place of her late father Shri Rakha Ram.

4. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced by Dr. Bhati and have gone through the material available on record.

5. On a careful consideration of the material placed on record, it becomes clear that the first and foremost requirement as per the Scheme for Compassionate Appointment approved by the Central Government, is that it is applicable to dependent family members of a government servant who dies in service.

6. A “Dependent Family Member” is defined as spo