SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(UK) 452

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Manish Thakur - Appellant
Versus
Anupam Viyas & Anr. - Respondents
Contempt Petition No. 304 of 2019
Decided On : 14-12-2021

Advocates Appeared:
Indu Sharma, Advocate, Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate, Bhuwnesh Joshi, Advocate

The absence of an age bar for appointments under the 5% quota meant for compassionate appointment influenced the court's decision to close the contempt petition based on the assurance given by the respondents.

Headnote:

Compassionate Appointment - Rejection of Claim - Assurance for Inclusion in Roaster - The court considered the rejection of the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment and the subsequent assurance by the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the roaster for compassionate appointment. The key legal provisions of compassionate appointment and the absence of age bar for appointments under the 5% quota were highlighted, influencing the court's decision to close the contempt petition.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment was rejected by the Competent Authority on the ground of non-availability of vacancies in the 5% quota meant for compassionate appointment. After the court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's claim, the Competent Authority again rejected the claim citing the absence of vacancies between 1995 to 2016.

Finding of the Court:

The court closed the contempt petition based on the assurance given by the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the roaster for compassionate appointment, without an age bar for appointments under the 5% quota.

Issues: Rejection of petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment, assurance by the respondents to include petitioner's name in the roaster, and discharge of contempt notices.

Ratio Decidendi: The assurance by the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the roaster for compassionate appointment, based on the absence of an age bar for appointments under the 5% quota, influenced the court's decision to close the contempt petition.

Final Decision: The contempt petition is closed, and the contempt notices issued to the respondents are discharged.

JUDGMENT

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. - Supplementary response-affidavit filed on behalf of respondents is taken on record.

2. Petitioner's father Late R.S. Thakur was serving as Ex-A.G. III in Food Corporation of India, who passed away in the year 2005. Petitioner applied for compassionate appointment but his application was rejected by the Competent Authority vide order dated 05.09.2013, on the ground of non-availability of vacancies, in the 5% quota meant for compassionate appointment. Petitioner challenged the said rejection order by filing Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1594 of 2014, which was allowed and respondents were directed to consider petitioner's claim, in view of the observations made in the writ petition.

3. Pursuant to the judgment, Competent Authority in Food Corporation of India considered petitioner's claim and again rejected the same vide order dated 11.10.2018, on the ground that between 1995 to 2016, there was no vacancy under 5% quota meant for compassionate appointment.

4. On the last occasion petitioner's counsel had pointed out from the order dated 11.10.2018 passed by Executive Director, North, F.C.I that between 1995 till December, 2016, compassionate appointments were made on the post of Watchmen. Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Senior Advocate appearing for the respondents had sought time to get instructions on this aspect of the matter.

5. Today, on instructions, Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Senior Advocate submitted that in the year 2014, a dependent of a deceased employee of F.C.I was appointed on compassionate grounds, however, the deceased employee concerned had passed away much earlier in the year 1995. He assured the Court that petitioner's name would be included as per seniority in the roaster prepared by F.C.I. for compassionate appointment, based on date of death of petitioner's father and petitioner would be considered for appointment, as and when his turn comes. He further informed the Court that there is no age bar for appointments made under 5% quota meant for compassionate appointment, as per policy applicable in F.C.I. He further assured the Court that Competent Authority will pass necessary order for including petitioner's name in the roaster, within a week.

6. In view of the assurance so given by Mr. Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, on instruction from Officers of F.C.I, namely Mr. H.N. Singh, Deputy General Manager (Pers.) and Mr. Arun Kumar, Assistant General Manager (Law), the contempt petition is closed.

7. Contempt notices issued to the respondents are hereby discharged.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top