ORDER

1. Petitioner has invoked Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 8.4.2021 (Annexure P/1), whereby, the respondent/Company has declined his request for compassionate appointment on the ground that petitioner has failed to acquire CPCT qualification. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction to respondents to grant him compassionate appointment as per Policy of 2016.

2. Facts necessary for decision of this case are that petitioner's father Late Shri Rambablu Rajak was working as Lineman in the Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidhyut Vitran Company Ltd. (for short “Company”). He expired on 27.4.2016 in an accident while performing his duty. After his death, petitioner made an application for grant of compassionate appointment.

3. At the time of death of petitioner's father as also on the date of applying for compassionate appointment, the Policy as circulated vide order dated 13.4.2016 (Annexure P/3) was prevailing. Clause 4.1 of the Policy provides for the posts on which the compassionate appointment can be given. Further Clause 5.1 of the Policy provides for the qualification required for appointment on the posts. For the present case, we are concerned with the qualification prescribed for the post of Assistant Revenue Officer (Equivalent to Office Assistant Grade III). The qualification as prescribed for said post in the policy itself is as under:-

4. The petitioner's case was considered by the Company. He was found qualified and suitable for appointment on the post of Security Guard. However, the said post was not available. Accordingly, vide letter dated 25.11.2016 (Annexure P/4), petitioner was granted two options- firstly, to opt for monetary benefits as provided in Clause 8.1 of the Policy or to acquire qualification for the post of Assistant Revenue Officer within a period of three years. The petitioner was asked to give his consent for either of the two options. It is not in dispute that the petitioner gave his consent for second option i.e. appointment on the post of Assistant Revenue Officer after acquiring requisite qualification within a period of three years. Accordingly, the respondent/Company vide communication dated 31.12.2016 (Annexure P/5) accepted petitioner's consent and accordingly, executed the following undertaking:-

^^vfHkopu
    ;g fd Jh vfer jtd firk LoŒ Jh jkeckcw jtd] uhfr 2013 ¼la'kksf/kr½ ds rgr vuqdaik fu;qfDr Ánku fd, tkus gsrq ÁkIr vkosnu ds voyksdu i'pkr vkosnd dks muds }kjk ÁLrqr fodYi rFkk uhfr ds Áko/kkuksa ds vuqlkj lgk;d jktLo vf/kdkjh ds in ij vuqdaik fu;qfDr ds fy, daiu }kjk fu/kkZfjr 'kS{kf.kd vgZrk fdlh ekU;rk ÁkIr fo'ofo|ky; ls f}rh; Js.kh esa Lukrd ds lkFk ;w-th-lh- ds led{k dEI;wVj ijh{kk mRrh.kZ vFkok 'kkldh; ikWyhVsfDud egkfo|ky; ls ekWMZu vkWfQl eSustesaV d¨lZ iw.kZ djus gsrq vf/kdre rhu o"kZ dk le; fn;k tkrk gSA
    mDr ifjÁs{; esa ,rn}kjk daiuh ;g vfHkopu nsrh gS] fd vkosnd }kjk mijksDr le;kof/k esa mDr in gsrq fuèkkZfjr 'kS{kf.kd vgZrk ÁkIr dj yh in ij fu;qfDr Ánku dh tk;sxhA**

5. It is thus, apparent that the respondent/Company furnished an undertaking that if the petitioner acquires qualification, as mentioned therein, for appointment on the post of Assistant Revenue Officer, he would be granted compassionate appointment on the said post. Acting upon the undertaking given by the Company, the petitioner acquired requisite qualification for appointment on the post of Assistant Revenue Officer. However, in the meantime, there was some change in the requisite qualification for the post of Assistant Revenue Officer. Vide circular dated 29.6.2018, th