Compassionate appointment not claimable after long delay without proven immediate financial crisis.

ORDER

This Original Application is filed under section 19(1) of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 seeking relief to quash order dated 26.03.2016 appended as Annexure-1 to this Original Application. Further prayer has been made for a direction upon the respondents to consider the case of the applicant for compassionate appointment under Dying in harness rules as per the facts and circumstances of the case within time bound period.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the husband of the applicant-1 Amar Nath died in harness on 08.02.2008 while working as Tentmender in Respondents’ department. Thereafter, she preferred an application along with relevant documents on 02.05.2008 for compassionate appointment in favour of her son i.e. applicant-2 herein, under Dying in Harness Rules. Pursuant thereto, the applicants were informed by the respondents vide order dated 06.05.2010 that the case of the applicants was considered by the Annual Board of Officers held for the years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 respectively, but the name of applicant-2 could not be recommended for compassionate appointment due to low merit and limited number of vacancies.

3. Against which, the applicants have earlier approached this Tribunal by way of Original Application No. 634/2011 and this Tribunal allowed the said Original Application vide order dated 04.06.2015 with a direction upon the respondents to consider the case of the applicant’s son for compassionate appointment as per rules and convey the developments to the applicant.

4. In compliance of the same, the respondents’ vide order dated 26.03.2016 rejected the case of the applicant-2 for compassionate appointment on the ground that the applicant-2 secured less merit points. Hence, this Original Application has been filed challenging the order dated 26.03.2016.

5. Respondents have filed counter affidavit on 04.07.2017, wherein it is stated that the case of the applicant-2 was not recommended for compassionate appointment as he has secured only 59 merit points whereas the last selected candidate had secured 66 merit points. The case of the applicant-2 for compassionate appointment was also reconsidered in view of the directions issued by this Tribunal in Original Application No. 634/2011. In compliance of the order direction issued in the said Original Application, the complete case of relaxation of normal rules of recruitment of the applicant’s son through Pre-Annul Supplementary Board is forwarded to integrated Head Quarter of Ministry of Defence vide letter No. 4667/Gen/Relax/Estt (Cell-1) dated 10.12.2015 for their consideration. The name of the applicant-2 has also been re-considered in Group-C post in the Annual Board of Officers for the year 2013-14, but as such, his case was not found fit due to low merit points and could not be recommended for compassionate appointment. The decision in this regard has been communicated to the applicants vide a Speaking order bearing no. C/46675/Relax/967/Estt (C-1) dated 26.03.2016. Therefore, the case of the applicants has no merit and may be dismissed accordingly.

6. Heard learned counsels for the parties.

7. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant was considered for compassionate appointment for the years prior to date of his father and the time limit of three years has already been withdrawn vide D.O.P&T OM No. 14014/3/2011 Estt.-(D) dated 26.07.2012. He further argues that during pendency of this Original Application, the applicants have further prayed to reconsider his case for compassi