High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMA RAO ELIPE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. PALANIVELU
Union of India, The Chief Postmaster General, Tamil Nadu Circle, Chennai-2 & Another
Versus
The Central Administrative Tribunal, City Civil Court Buildings, Chennai104 & Another
W.P.Nos.38990 of 2002, 2832 to 2835 of 2003, 9996 of 2003, 10059 of 2003, 30188 of 2003, 30345 of 2003, 34623 of 2003, 2567 of 2004, 2711 of 2004, 2750 of 2004, 2762 of 2004, 3003 of 2004, 3004 of 2004, 3766 of 2004, 3767 of 2004, 3810 of 2004, 4163 of 2004, 4164 of 2004, 4172 of 2004, 4940 of 2004, 4986 of 2004, 5132 of 2004, 6369 of 2004, 6424 of 2004, 11367 of 2004, 21433 of 2004, 22944 of 2004 & 19967 of 2005 and W.P.M.P.Nos.58153 of 2002, 3542 to 3545 of 2003, 12665 of 2003, 12760 of 2003
Decided On : 20-06-2007
Compassionate Appointment - Postal Department - [The Postal Department Act, various sections] - The court discussed the legal provisions related to compassionate appointments, including the 5% vacancy limit, the availability of vacancies, and the consideration of candidates for appointment in other departments. The court emphasized the need for appointments to be made on a regular basis and the obligation to consider the financial hardship of the deceased employee's family. The court also highlighted the legitimate expectation of the applicants for regularization of their appointments and the inappropriateness of offering non-civil posts like Grameena Dak Sevak to the applicants.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants, dependents of deceased or retired Postal Department staff, sought regular appointments on compassionate grounds. The Department offered them Grameena Dak Sevak posts instead of regularizing their appointments, leading to legal challenges.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Department's offer of Grameena Dak Sevak posts to the applicants was without basis and upheld the Tribunal's decision to direct the Department to consider the applicants for regularization against regular vacancies.
Issues: The main issue was the Department's decision to offer Grameena Dak Sevak posts to the applicants instead of regularizing their appointments.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the legitimate expectation of the applicants for regularization and the inappropriateness of offering non-civil posts to them. It also highlighted the need for compassionate appointments to be made on a regular basis and the obligation to consider the financial hardship of the deceased employee's family.
Final Decision: The court dismissed all the writ petitions and directed the Department to regularize the services of the applicants against regular vacancies within three months.
Dharmarao Elipe, J.
Since all the matters are inextricably connected with each other, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order.
2. The applicants before the Tribunal, who are the respondents herein, are all the dependents of Group-C and Group-D Staff of the Postal Department, who died in harness or retired voluntarily on medical grounds and they all have been approved for appointment on compassionate grounds in Group-C and Group-D posts. They all are working in various leave vacancies and short term vacancies. Since number of vacancies are lying vacant, their services are being utililzed for leave vacancies and thus they are serving without any break in service. The applicants were awaiting appointment in regular posts and were also imparted clerical training by the Department itself. After the judgment of the Apex Court in UMESH KUMAR NAGPAL vs. STATE OF HARYANA [(1994) 4 SCC 138], fixing the number of vacancies to be filled up by compassionate ground appointment as 5%, the Chief Post Master General, Tamil Nadu circle, issued a letter on 25. 2001, seeking willingness in writing for consideration for appointment on compassionate grounds by other Ministries/Department from the candidates approved for compassionate appointment, who could not be given employment in the petitioner Department since they can also be absorbed in other Government Departments. Accordingly, all the applicants have submitted their willingness giving a choice of departments in which they prefer to be appointed on regular basis.
.3. While things stood thus, the Ministry of Communications, Union of India, by the orders dated 27. 2001 and 1. 2002, impugned before the Tribunal, has taken a decision that any maintenance of the waiting list of approved candidates for compassionate appointment should be discontinued immediately and since the waiting list has been disposed, this may cause hardship to the approved candidates and in consideration of these aspects, a decision was taken to consider such wait listed candidates for vacancies in the post of Extra Departmental Staff. Based on the said letter, the Chief Post Master General, Tamil Nadu Circle, has issued a letter on 8. 2001 to various Post Masters seeking a list of vacancies in the Extra Departmental Staff. Aggrieved, the applicants have filed a batch of Original Applications before the Tribunal praying to set aside the letter dated 27. 2001 of the Ministry of Communications, Union of India and to direct the Department to appoint the applicants as Postal Assistants within a time limit.
4. The writ petitioners/Department filed a common counter before the Tribunal stating that the compassionate appointment cases are considered by the Circle Selection Committee, constituted in accordance with instructions of Directorates Letter No.24-269/87-SPB 1 dated 29. 1989 on merits; that as per the scheme of compassionate appointment circulated by the Department of Personnel & Training OM No.14014/6/94-Estt (D) dated 10. 1998, it has been clearly mentioned at para 7(f) that if sufficient vacancies are not available in any particular office to accommodate the persons in the waiting list for compassionate appointment, it is open to the administrative Ministry/Department/Office to take up the matter with other Ministries/Departments/Offices of the Government of India to provide at an early date appointment on compassionate grounds to those in the waiting list; the Supreme Court has ruled in the cases of HIMACHAL ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION vs. DINESH KUMAR [JT 1996(5) SC 319] and HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED vs. SMT.A.RADHIKA THIRUMALAI [JT 1996 (9) SC 197] that appointment on compassionate grounds can be made only if a vacancy is available for that purpose.
.5. It is further submitted that by OM.No.14014/23/99-Estt(d) dated 12. 1999, it was further clarified by Department of Personnel and Training that the Committee for considering a request for appointment on compassionate ground should
AI
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.