IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Sujit Narayan Prasad, Navneet Kumar, JJ.
Bsant Toppo – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand and ors. – Respondents
L.P. A. No. 193 of 2022
Decided On : 29-08-2023
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 14, 16 – Indian Penal Code, 1950 – Sections 147/148/149/307/302/120 (B) – U.P. Act – Sections ¾ - Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, - Section 17 – Arms Act, 1959 – Section 27 – Criminal Conspiracy – Offence of Murder – Attempt to murder – Appointed on compassionate – Claim of petitioner for compassionate appointment – Held, Once accepting earlier negative order, making subsequent prayer in favour of other is not permissible, since, issue with respect to compassionate ground is to be considered regarding entitlement of person for appointment on compassionate ground and once it is rejected other dependent will have no occasion again to insist to provide appointment on compassionate ground due to reason that appointment on compassionate ground cannot be claimed as a matter of right in view of Article 14 and 16 of Constitution of India – Appeal dismissed.
ORDER :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
The instant appeal preferred under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent, is directed against the order/judgment dated 02.03.2022 passed in W.P.(S) No. 2737 of 2019 whereby and whereunder the learned Single Judge of this Court has refused to pass positive direction upon the respondents for consideration of the case of the appellant/ writ petitioner for his appointment on compassionate ground on account of death of his own brother, who had died in an extremist attack on 30.06.2008 while working as Constable.
2. Brief facts of the case as per the pleadings made in the writ proceeding, which are required to be enumerated herein, read as under :-
The petitioner’s elder brother namely Egnasiyus Toppo was appointed as Police-2384, Ranchi District Force on 08.10.2005 and was posted under Tamar Police Station and subsequently he discharged his duty with full satisfaction of the department but unfortunately during service tenure he got martyred on 30.06.2008 in a terrorist/Naxal attack near Pundidiri Karkari river, under Tamar Police Station and in this regard a case being Tamar P.S. Case No.62 of 2008 dated 30.06.2008 has been instituted under Sections 147/148/149/307/302/120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code, Section 17 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, Sections 3/4 of the U.P. Act and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.
2(i). The above mentioned facts are evident from the Service-Book Record, Death Certificate dated 02.08.2008 as well as the memo no.3560/Sa.Sha. dated 19.07.2008 issued from the office of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi by which Rs.19, 68, 624/- (Rupees nineteen lacs sixty-eight thousand six hundred twenty-four) has been released to his legal dependent. After the death of the deceased employee, vide District Order No.2875/08 contained in memo no.3621/Sa.Sha. dated 22.07.2008 has been issued by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi, Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lace) has been ordered to be released to the valid dependent of the deceased employee. Thereafter vide memo no.3739/ Sa.Sha. dated 24.07.2008 issued through the office of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi for payment of amount of familiar, concession, Group Insurance, salary etc. were approved.
2(ii). Thereafter, the widow of the Late Egnasiyus Toppo namely Smt. Anjana Toppo has submitted an application before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi on 17.06.2013 stating therein that on her own will and desire she wants that her Dewar (writ petitioner) be appointed on compassionate basis in place of her deceased husband because of the fact that the petitioner is looking after her and the entire family members after the death of her husband and she is also going to marry with her Dewar (writ petitioner).
2(iii). The Circle officer, Dumri has issued Caste Certificate on 29.06.2012, Familiar Membership Certificate and Genealogy Certificate on 31.07.2013 in favour of the writ petitioner. Thereafter he has submitted his entire educational qualification certificates i.e. Matric, Intermediate pass from Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi and Graduation from St. Xavier's College, Ranchi University, Ranchi in the concerned department to do needful with regard to the compassionate appointment.
2(iv). Thereafter vide memo no.2994/Ra.Ka. dated 12.04.2014 issued from the office of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi, the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment has been denied in the light of Sankalp No.2597 dated 09.06.2011 issued from the State Government.
2(v). Thereafter, the mother of the writ petitioner has submitted representations before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi on 21.11.2015 stating therein that Smt. Anjana Toppo, widow of deceased employee, who had filed application dated 17.06.2013 has fled away from her house and is traceless, hence compassionate appointment may be provided to her son Basant Toppo –writ petitioner and the payment of financial benefits and Pension etc. which are s
Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Madhusudan Das & Ors.
Umesh Kumar Nagpal Vs. State of Haryana
SupremeToday
Compassionate appointments are not a vested right and must address immediate financial need, as long delays undermine claims.
The court ruled that the failure to consider a representation for compassionate appointment is illegal and arbitrary, emphasizing the need for equitable treatment under the compassionate appointment ....
Compassionate appointment is an exception and a concession, not a right, and should be made strictly in accordance with the rules. Long delays can lead to the rejection of compassionate appointments.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.