JUDGMENT :

Saurabh Lavania, J.

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition, for the following main reliefs:-

"1. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari thereby quashing the impugned judgment and order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 12.04.2017 and Rejection Order dated 23.07.2015 passed by O.P. No. 4 Assistant General Manager, Lucknow, contained Annexure No. 1 and 9 to the writ petition.

2. To issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus Commanding the Opp. Parties to consider the case of the petitioner for Appointment under Scheme for Compassionate Appointment dated 09.10.1998, in the interest of Justice."

3. The brief facts of the case are that father of the petitioner was working in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. on the post of Phone Mechanic. On 15.07.2005, the father of the petitioner died and the petitioner moved an application dated 23.02.2006 for compassionate appointment before the General Manager Telecom, BSNL, Faizabad and the same was forwarded to the Chief General Manager, Telecom, U.P. (East) Circle, Lucknow. Thereafter, vide letter/order dated 21.01.2018, the High Power Committee rejected the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment. Thereafter, aggrieved by the said order dated 21.01.2018, the petitioner filed the Original Application No. 404 of 2009 before the Central Administrative Tribunal (in short "Tribunal") and the same was allowed by the order dated 06.05.2011. The Tribunal directed the opposite parties to consider the case of the petitioner afresh in view of Circular dated 09.10.1998. The relevant portion of the order dated 06.05.2011, is reproduced below:-

"Finally, therefore, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this O.A. deserves to be and is accordingly allowed. The impugned order dated 21.1.2008 (Annexure -1) alongwith minutes of the High Power Committee dated 11.12.2007 passed by the respondent authorities, so far it relates to the applicant, are hereby set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the applicant afresh in view of the relevant O.M./circulars which were in force at the relevant time, ignoring the subsequent circular letter dated 27.06.2007 which cannot have retrospective effect. As the matter is already become quite old, it is desirable that this matter is finalized within a reasonable period say within 6 months from the date of certified copy of this order is produced by the applicant to the respondents. No order as to costs."

4. Thereafter, the order dated 06.05.2011 passed by the Tribunal in O.A. No. 404 of 2009, was challenged by the opposite parties by filing Writ Petition No.1877(SB) of 2011 (Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Versus Amit Kumar Singh) and the same was also dismissed by this Court vide order dated 03.11.2011, which reads as under:-

"We have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the pleadings of writ petition.

Learned counsel for petitioner, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, submitted that the direction to reconsider the case of respondent as given vide the impugned order is contrary to a judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court reported in (State Bank of India & Others vs. Jaspal Kaur, (2007) 1 ESC 66 (SC)) which has laid down the ratio that unless the financial condition is entirely penury, compassionate appointment cannot be made. In the said case, the financial condition of the applicant was not found to be one of destitution and besides the Bank had already paid a sum of Rs. 4,57,607.00 as terminal benefits apart from payment of a pensionary benefit of Rs. 2055/- per month.

On a careful consideration of rival submissions, we do not find any merit in the case for the reason that the Tribunal has only directed the Corporation to reconsider the case of the respondent and has not issued any direction to give appointment on compassionate ground.

Thus, the Writ Petition is dismissed."

5. Th