Sole surviving married daughter entitled to compassionate appointment; rejection on being only survivor, parental employment, pensions, or settlement dues unsustainable without proper financial assessment; marital status no bar, violates Article 14.

ORDER

By Justice M.G. Sewlikar, Member (J)

This is an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for appointment on compassionate ground.

2. Facts in brief are that the applicant is the married daughter of the deceased Shri Pramod Fakirde who was the employee of the South East Central Railway, Nagpur. The deceased Shri Pramod Fakirde passed away on 13^th September, 2000. The mother of the applicant was appointed on compassionate ground after death of her husband Shri Pramod Fakirde. The mother of the applicant passed away in the year 2018. The applicant got married on 26th May, 2023. She filed application for compassionate appointment on 09th May, 2018. The respondents rejected the application for compassionate appointment vide order dated 02^nd November, 2020 on following grounds:-

“In the instant case the following points are noticed:-

i) You are the only surviving member in the family.

ii) Both of your parents were railway employees.

iii) You are recipient of both family pension and have also received substantial amount of settlement dues.

There are no other family liabilities or dependents.”

3. This order is impugned in this O.A.

4. Respondents filed their reply. They contend that compassionate appointment is not the right of the heirs of the employee. They contend in the affidavit that the competent authority has to satisfy itself about the financial condition of the family by making the objective assessment in that regard. The competent authority also has to consider number of dependents, assets and liabilities left by the Railway employee, income of any member of the family, as also his liability, including the aspect of whether the earning member is residing with the family of the deceased employee and whether he provides any support to other members of the family. In the case at hand, the applicant is not entitled to compassionate appointment, as she is the only surviving member of the family and she had received an amount of Rs. 12,06,742/- towards settlement dues.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the respondents.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the case of Sou. Swara Sachin Kulkarni versus The Superintending Engineer, Pune Irrigation Project Circle and Anr. in writ petition no. 11987 of 2012 (Bombay High Court) dated 6th December, 2013 and Neelam Devi versus State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Co- Operative Lko And Ors. Writ- A No. 18566 of 2021 (Allahabad High Court) dated 17^th July, 2023, High Court has held that a sole surviving member of the family is entitled to compassionate appointment. She submits that, therefore, the first ground is not available for the respondents for rejection. So far as second ground is concerned, she submits that both the parents of the applicant were not railway employees. Applicant’s mother got the employment on compassionate ground. Therefore, this ground is also not available for the respondents. So far as third ground is concerned, she submits that on her marriage, her family pension has been stopped by the respondents. Receipt of substantial amount of settlement dues is not a consideration for grant of compassionate appointment.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that being the sole surviving member of the family, she has nobody to support. Compassionate appointment is granted to the dependents of the employees with a sublime object that he/she will support the other dependents of the deceased