Compassionate appointments cannot be annulled without proper inquiry, and the absence of a prescribed application format does not imply concealment of material facts.

JUDGMENT :

Ajit Kumar, J.

1. Heard Sri Adarsh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 28.08.2021 whereby petitioner's services have been dispensed with only on the ground that while seeking compassionate appointment for his father dying in harness on 01.02.2008, vide application dated 29.02.2008, he concealed this material fact that his mother was already under Government service.

3. Meeting the grounds raised in the order impugned in this petition, Sri Adarsh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the petitioner as a matter of fact did not concealed any material fact while seeking compassionate appointment. He submitted two points, firstly that in those days in the year 2008 when the applications for compassionate appointment were invited by the respondents there was no form prescribed as such which may require particular information to be furnished and also the petitioner had annexed the copy of family register which very much disclosed that both the parents of the petitioner were in Government Service. Copy of the family register has been annexed alongwith the petition as Annexure-2. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to the pleadings raised in paragraph no.20 of the writ petition in which it is clearly stated that the application that was filed for seeking compassionate appointment of the petitioner was accompanied by the family register. He submits that this paragraph 20 has not been denied in the counter affidavit as paragraph no.6 of the counter affidavit itself contains averment to the effect that the application of the petitioner seeking compassionate appointment was accompanied by High school and Intermediate marksheet and certificate, death certificate, copy of family register, caste certificate, domicile certificate, succession certificate and also no objection from his mother Smt. Asha Devi, sister Supriya Sonam and Shweta Sonam and brother Saurabh. All those affidavits were notarized affidavits giving no objection for employment to be offered to the petitioner on compassionate basis.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the light of these above facts it cannot be said that the petitioner concealed any material fact from the respondents for seeking compassionate appointment and hence the ground assigned in the order impugned is absolutely unsustainable. It is further submitted that the petitioner was offered compassionate appointment on 15.08.2008 and on a sheer third party complaint proceedings got initiated against him by issuing show cause notice on 19.08.2021 after a lapse of more than a decade of his appointment requiring him to explain his conduct. It is further submitted that the petitioner explained his conduct before the authority stating in his reply very clearly that he had filed documents and no specific information otherwise was required by the respondents while considering the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment. He also submits that the petitioner's appointment which is a compassionate appointment was permanent in nature and hence could not have been annulled by merely conducting a summary enquiry ordinarily meant for minor punishments.

5. He has placed before the Court the Division Bench jugdment of this Court in the case of State of U.P. through its Principal Secre