Compassionate policy's 'family' interpreted per Panchayati Raj law; prior Gram Sabha-recognized separation via Parivar Register excludes employed sibling from joint family, rendering employment bar inapplicable to other dependents.

Judgment :

Ranjan Sharma, J.

Petitioner, Tarsem Pathania, has initially filed OA No.6432 of 2017, which upon abolition of State Administrative Tribunal stands transferred to this Court, as CWPOA No. 3263 of 2020, seeking the following relief:-

“7(i) That the respondents may be directed to give employment to the applicant on compassionate grounds immediately and with retrospective date.”

FACTUAL MATRIX:

2. Grievance of the petitioner is that his father died during service as Deputy Ranger on 30.08.2007. Petitioner, being the dependent applied for compassionate appointment but since no action was taken, the petitioner filed an Original Application i.e. O.A. [D] No.199 of 2016 before Learned State Administrative Tribunal, which was disposed of on 27.09.2016 [Annexure A-4], directing Respondent No 2- Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to consider and take decision on reference as in Annexure A-13.

2(i). Despite directions passed by the State Administrative Tribunal on 27.09.2016 [Annexure A-4], the Respondents have been twisting the matter primarily on the ground that the petitioner’s elder brother, Armeet Kumar is in Government Service ignoring that the petitioner had furnished the documents-copies of the certificate as well as the Parivar Registrar, Annexure P-21 and Annexure P-20, respectively to establish that his elder brother had been living separately since 07.01.2007 [Annexure P-20], i.e. prior to the death of his father on 30.08.2007 and, therefore, the stand of Respondents in denying the consideration was arbitrary and illegal.

2(ii). During the pendency of the instant petition, the State Authorities issued another communication dated 16.08.2024 [Annexure R-V] [at page 101 of the paper book], directing the petitioner to furnish the income certificate of his elder brother, Armeet Kumar, just to delay the matter, which was unfair, unreasonable, illegal and unconstitutional.

STAND OF STATE AUTHORITIES-RESPONDENTS:

3. Pursuant to the issuance of notice, the State Authorities have filed the Reply-Affidavit of Conservator of Forests, Dharamshala Circle, verified on 08.02.2018.

3(i). Para-3 of the Preliminary Submissions of Reply-Affidavit reiterates the objection that Bhag Singh, the deceased employee and father of the petitioner, died on 30.08.2007 leaving three sons, out of whom one is already in Government Service as in communication dated 18.03.2009 [Annexure R-III]. Further in Para-7 of Reply-Affidavit, the Respondents have stated that petitioner was asked to submit some documents and after receipts of documents his case shall be submitted to the Government for consideration.

REBUTTAL-REJOINDER BY PETITIONER:

4. Petitioner filed a Rejoinder, stating that the plea taken by the Respondents was not justified, as the elder brother of petitioner, namely, Armeet Kumar, who was serving in Army, had already separated from joint family before the demise of his father, Bhag Singh and therefore, the plea was vitiated by non-application of mind.

5. Heard, Mr. Yudhbir Singh Thakur, Learned Counsel, for the petitioner and Mr. Hemant K. Verma, Learned Deputy Advocate General.

6. Before proceeding to analyze the claim, it is necessary to have to recap of the Compassionate Appointment Policy dated 18.01.1990 [Clause 1, 2 and Clause 5 (d)] reads under:-

“Clause 1 & 2 of Policy dated 18.01.1990:

The undersig