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

2017 Supreme(Jhk) 1242

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
S.N. PATHAK, J.
Ramawatar Kumar Chandravansi – Appellant
Vs.
Food Corporation of India, through its Managing Director, Bihar, Patna – Respondent
W.P.(S) No. 2393 of 2008
Decided on : 20-06-2017

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Mrs. M.M. Pal, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Satish Bakshi, Advocate.

Authorities are bound to consider the case for compassionate appointment as per the scheme when the offer has been accepted and not denied, and laches on their part cannot be ruled out.

Headnote:

Compassionate Appointment - Appointment on Compassionate Ground - F.C.I. Circular dated 3rd July, 1996 - [i, ii, iii, iv, v, vi, vii, viii, ix] - The court discussed the F.C.I. circular dated 3rd July, 1996, which specified the conditions for compassionate appointment, including age limits, medical certification, category of appointment, and financial considerations. The court emphasized that the authorities are bound to consider the case for compassionate appointment as per the scheme when the offer has been accepted and not denied, and laches on their part cannot be ruled out.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought appointment on compassionate ground after his father's premature retirement on medical grounds. The authorities had not taken any action on the pending representation, leading to extreme hardship for the family.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the authorities had committed wrong and laches by not considering the case for compassionate appointment as per the scheme. It directed the respondents to consider the case and issue a reasoned order within six weeks, with a letter of appointment to be issued within four weeks if there is no legal impediment.

Issues: Delay in considering the case for compassionate appointment, failure of the authorities to take action on the pending representation, and the petitioner's entitlement to appointment on compassionate ground.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the authorities are bound to consider the case for compassionate appointment as per the scheme when the offer has been accepted and not denied, and laches on their part cannot be ruled out.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the respondents were directed to consider the case for appointment on compassionate ground as per the scheme, issuing a reasoned order within six weeks and a letter of appointment within four weeks if there is no legal impediment.

JUDGMENT :

S.N. PATHAK, J.

The petitioner has approached this Hon'ble Court with a prayer for consideration of his case for appointment on compassionate ground in view of the scheme and circular prevalent in the Department and further to pass a reasoned and final order on the pending representation of the petitioner as his father retired prematurely on medical ground.

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. The factual exposition as has been delineated in the writ application is that the father of the petitioner was posted at F.S.D., Ranchi during the period from 2001 to 2002 and was suffering from several ailments including the severe back pain and was not in a position to perform his duties regularly for which he also applied for leave from time to time.

3. It is stated that when the health condition of the petitioner's father deteriorated too much having no alternative in the year 2003 the petitioner applied for his retirement on medical ground and for employment to his eldest son on compassionate ground. The Assistant Manager (D) F.C.I. vide order dated 28.01.2003 directed the father of the petitioner to be examined by Chief District Medical Officer (Civil Surgeon) and to submit the medical certificate for considering the employment of his son on medical ground. In pursuance to the order and direction, the father of the petitioner was medically examined by the Chief Medical Officer/Civil Surgeon and a report was submitted to that extent for necessary action. The father of the petitioner was also directed to submit affidavit/undertaking for the purpose of employment of the present petitioner on compassionate ground consequent upon his retirement on medical ground which was duly submitted by the petitioner and his father. The entire documents relating to employment of dependents in case of death in harness or regarding retirement on medical ground was produced and submitted before the authorities. It will be evident from the records that father of the petitioner applied for retirement on medical ground at the age of 53 years with request to provide employment to his son the present petitioner. It is further stated that the father of the petitioner was also made a detailed representation dated 22.03.2003 before the Senior Regional Manager, F.C.I. Regional Office, Ranchi through proper channel mentioning therein that he is unable to do handling work due to incapability of carrying 100 K.G. Bag so voluntarily he wants to retire on medical ground with condition that his son the present petitioner could be provided with an employment in his place as Handling Labour.

4. It is also the case of the petitioner that his father was the only earning member in their family and on his retirement none of the family members considered for employment the entire family would be put to extreme hardship.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that his father was made to retire vide office order dated 19.10.2004 issued by the District Manager, District Office, Ranchi w.e.f. 28.10.2004 from the service of the Corporation as has been declared completely and permanently incapacitated for further service of any kind in Food Corporation of India by the competent authority (Annexure-6). A further notification was also issued regarding retirement of the petitioner along with other employees vide order dated 27.10.2004 but till date no orders have been passed regarding employment of the present petitioner and the respondents are sitting tight over the pending representation and hence this present writ application has been preferred.

6. Mrs. M.M. Pal learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mrs. Mahua Palit, Advocate vehemently argued that the case of the petitioner is a fit case for appointment on compassionate ground and is fully covered by the scheme/circular of the Department which speaks of appointment on compassionate ground when the employee retires on medical ground.

7. Learned Counsel argued that petitioner's father as well the petitioner himself made several applications/representations






































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top