IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, RATNAKER BHENGRA, JJ.
Joginder Kour W/o Late Ajaib Singh – Appellant
Versus
The Central Coalfields Limited – Respondent
LPA No. 656 of 2019
Decided On : 02-01-2023
Compassionate Appointment - National Coal Wages Agreement - Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs. State of Haryana (1994) 4 SCC 138, Central Coalfields Limited vs. Parden Oraon, 2021 SCC Online SC 299 - The court discussed the scheme of National Coal Wages Agreement, the principles of compassionate appointment, and the conditions for offering compassionate employment. The court highlighted the constitutional mandate under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and emphasized that compassionate appointment must be within the four corners of the scheme itself. The court also emphasized that compassionate appointment cannot be granted after a long lapse of time.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants challenged the order declining their prayer for appointment of the appellant No. 2 on compassionate ground after the death of her elder son, who was a trainee Mining Sirdar. The writ Court held that the NCWA scheme does not provide for one after another family members to be accommodated in the compassionate appointment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the rejection order dated 16th February 2005 was not challenged in the writ proceeding, and the appellants' insistence on a direction for compassionate appointment after 20 years since the death of the son was not justified.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant No. 2 was entitled to compassionate appointment under the NCWA scheme after the death of her elder son, who was a trainee Mining Sirdar.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that compassionate appointment must be within the four corners of the scheme itself and cannot be granted after a long lapse of time. The court also highlighted the principles of compassionate appointment as discussed in the cases of Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs. State of Haryana and Central Coalfields Limited vs. Parden Oraon.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and found no ground to interfere with the writ Court’s order.
ORDER :
1. The appellants have challenged the order dated 14th August 2019 passed in WP (S) No. 1515 of 2013 by which their prayer for appointment of the appellant No. 2 on compassionate ground has been declined by the writ Court.
2. The appellant No. 1 is mother of the appellant No. 2 for whose appointment the appellant No. 1 submitted an application in the year 2002, after the death of her elder son in harness on 10th November 2001.
3. The writ Court has held that the scheme of National Coal Wages Agreement (in short ‘NCWA’) does not envisage appointment on compassionate ground to the members of the family, one after another. The writ Court has also observed that the order dated 16th February 2005 by which the application for compassionate appointment of the appellant No. 2 was rejected was not challenged in the writ proceeding.
4. The writ Court held as under:
5. M/s Central Coalfields Limited (in short ‘CCL’) has taken a ground that the elder brother of the appellant No. 2 who died on 10th November 2001 was not a regular employee rather a Trainee Mining Sirdar, who had just completed 2nd phase of training.
6. Mrs. M.M. Pal, the learned senior counsel for the appellants, has submitted that the appellant No. 1 applied for appointment of her elder son, namely, Jaspal Singh under the Special Female VRS Scheme and while so the stand taken by the CCL that the application for compassionate appointment to the appellant No. 2 was a kind of hereditary employment, one after another, is unfounded. It is further submitted that in course of employment of elder brother of the appellant No. 2 his service book was opened which duly recorded all necessary information about him and, moreover, the appointment on compassionate ground cannot be ad hoc or temporary, rather it must always be permanent in nature.
7. Briefly stated, the appellant No. 1 was appointed on compassionate ground in the year 1992 and five years after that she took voluntary retirement under the Special Female VRS Scheme, exercising the option for appointment of a dependent in her place. Accordingly, Jaspal Singh who was her elder son was appointed on 18th January 1999 as a trainee Mining Sirdar on stipend of Rs. 2500/- per month. The said Jaspal Singh was placed for undergoing mines training at Ray u/g Mines of Bachra Project for a period of six months from 10th April 2001 to 9th October 2001. The appellants have pleaded that on account of his illness he remained absent from duty and died on 10th November 2001. However, the CCL has projected that Jaspal Singh was a habitual absentee who before could complete his training died in harness.
8. In the counter-affidavit dated 15th July 2022, the CCL has pleaded that Jaspal Singh attended the duty of twelve days each in May 2001 and June 2001 and, thereafter, remained absent from training without any intimation and permission to leave. Mr. D.K. Chakraverty, the learned counsel for the CCL, states that as per the records maintained by the CCL, Jaspal Singh attended duty just one day in April 2001 and he remained absent from 20th June 2001 till his death was reported by producing a death certificate issued by Brindavan Hospital and Research Centre, Ranchi Road, Hazaribagh.
9. The aforesaid facts clearly bring out that there were several applications for appointment on compassionate grounds from the family of the appellant No. 1, who herself was offered appointment on death of her husband. The scheme for compassionate appointment is formulated by the employer to provide sustenance to the family in distress and no dependent has a vested right to claim appointment on compassiona
Compassionate appointment must be within the four corners of the scheme itself and cannot be granted after a long lapse of time.
Compassionate appointments are an exception to the general recruitment rules and contingent upon strict adherence to governing schemes; eligibility requires eligibility criteria to be met, such as mi....
Compassionate appointment is an exception and a concession, not an absolute right, and should be made strictly in accordance with the rules. It is a means to enable the family of the deceased to get ....
Compassionate appointment is an exception and a concession, not an absolute right, and should be provided only to eligible candidates who can establish the genuineness of their claim.
Compassionate appointment is a concession, not a right, and should be made only for deserving cases within a reasonable period after the death of the employee, in accordance with Articles 14 and 16 o....
Compassionate appointment is an exception to the general rule of appointment, and no aspirant has a right to compassionate appointment. Appointment on compassionate ground can only be made on fulfill....
Compassionate appointment is granted to meet the sudden crisis on account of the death of the breadwinner while in service, and it is not a vested right that can be exercised at any time in the futur....
Compassionate appointment is a concession and not an absolute right, to be provided within a reasonable period of time from the date of death of the deceased employee, in accordance with the State's ....
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.