Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Sanjay Kumar Gupta, J.
Miss Neelakshi Tuli - Petitioner
Vs.
State of J&K and ors. – Respondents
SWP No. 400 of 2009
Decided On : 03-08-2018
Compassionate Appointment - Government Employee - Jammu and Kashmir (Compassionate Appointment) Rules, 1994, Rule 2 - The court discussed the application of the Jammu and Kashmir (Compassionate Appointment) Rules, 1994, specifically Rule 2, and highlighted the conditions for seeking appointment under SRO 43. The court also referenced Section 108 of the Evidence Act to establish the statutory presumption of a person's death if not heard of for 7 years.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, claiming eligibility for compassionate appointment under SRO-43 of 1994, sought appointment as a Music Teacher in lieu of her missing mother, a deceased government employee. The respondents, however, rejected the petitioner's claim on the grounds that the mother was missing and not dead, and that the petitioner was not dependent on her mother at the time of her disappearance.
Finding of the Court:
The court dismissed the petition, citing that the petitioner's application for compassionate appointment was not maintainable as her mother was missing and not declared dead at the time of application. The court also highlighted the decree from the Civil Court declaring the mother as dead and the father as the sole legal heir, establishing that the petitioner was not dependent on her mother at the time of her disappearance.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the eligibility for compassionate appointment under SRO-43 of 1994, the dependency of the petitioner on her missing mother, and the statutory presumption of a person's death if not heard of for 7 years.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the inapplicability of the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment under SRO-43 of 1994 due to the missing status of the mother at the time of application and the lack of dependency of the petitioner on her mother. The court also relied on the statutory presumption of a person's death if not heard of for 7 years as per Section 108 of the Evidence Act.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed as it lacked merit, with the court emphasizing that the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment was not maintainable under the given circumstances.
1. The petitioner claims to be a Graduate in Music & Fine Arts from Jammu University and Post Graduate in Music from Punjab University.
2. The case set up by the petitioner is that her mother Smt. Satya Devi Verma, was working as Senior Lecturer in District Institute of Education and Training (DIET) Jammu. It is averred in the writ petition that on 03.10.1998, the mother of the petitioner left home for attending her duties in the office of DIET, Jammu, but she did not return home in the evening, thereby compelling the petitioner to approach the police authorities and a missing report was lodged. The mother of the petitioner was reported missing/declared dead on 03.10.1998 while in active service of the respondent-department. The petitioner claims that she is fully eligible for compassionate appointment under SRO-43 of 1994 i.e. J&K (Compassionate Appointment) Rules, 1994, age-wise as well as qualification-wise.
3. It is stated in the petition that petitioner had made a written request for compassionate appointment to Principal, District Institute of Education and Trainings, Jammu within time, wherein a request was made to appoint the petitioner on compassionate and humanitarian ground on the post of Music Teacher in lieu of her mother, the deceased Govt. employee. However, Respondent No. 4, Principal, District Institute of Education and Trainings, Jammu Kept the matter pending on one pretext or the other and has not considered the claim of the petitioner. In the petition it is further averred that mother of the petitioner, Smt. Satya Devi Verma was a Government employee and was financially supporting the entire family of the petitioner including her two younger sisters and due to stoppage of regular financial assistance to the family of the petitioner has resulted great hardship and sufferings. It is averred in the petition that respondents has deprived the petitioner of her legal right to appointment on compassionate grounds.
4. It is further stated that vide communication dated 10.04.2001, Respondent No. 4 recommended the case of the Petitioner to Respondent No. 2, Director, School Education, Jammu for considering the claim of the petitioner on compassionate grounds for appointment as Teacher. The said recommendation was not considered and on 04.12.2004 respondent No. 2 had written a letter to respondent No. 3 for furnishing the requisite documents/information of the petitioner, however, Respondents have not intimated the petitioner for furnishing of the requisite documents and only on 13.09.2006, Respondent No. 3, Chief Education Officer, Jammu petitioner was intimated to supply the requisite documents. The petitioner thereafter provided the requisite documents to the respondents.
5. In the petition is submitted that on 19.07.2006 the petitioner obtained a decree from Civil Court, whereby her mother Smt. Satya Devi Verma has been declared as dead and the dependants, namely, Neelakshi Tuli and Charu Tuli have been declared as sole legal heirs of the deceased- late Smt. Satya Devi Verma. The petitioner thereafter furnished the legal heir certificate to the respondents and also applied for justification certificate under SRO 43 of 1994 before the Deputy Commissioner, Jammu. The Deputy Commissioner, Jammu after conducting the enquiry by the Tehsildar, issued the same to the petitioner and the said certificate was submitted to the Respondents for considering her case for compassionate appointment. However, vide communication dated 06.01.2009, the Respondents have rejected the case of the petitioner without any valid ground.
6. Objections have been filed by the respondents. The stand taken by the respondents is that SRO 43 of 1994 is applicable only in case of employees who die in harness or as a result of militancy related action. The further stand taken by the respondents in the objections is that mother of the petitioner was reported missing in the year 1998 and not dead, as such, petitioner was not entitled to be appoint
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
