Compassionate appointment eligibility requires proof of legal marital status and financial need, as per regulations and judicial precedents.

ORDER

1. This OA has been filed on 15.07.2021 Under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for quashment of order dated 15.01.2018 and 16.07.2018 (both Annexures A-1). By the impugned letter, the respondents rejected the claim of the applicant for compassionate appointment because the death of her father Shri Suresh Chandra Sharma. The relief(s) claimed in para 8 of the OA as under:-

“I. To quash the impugned order dated 15.01.2018 and 16.07.2018 (Annexure No.1 to the original Application) passed by respondent no.2 rejecting the claim of the applicant for compassionate appointment.

II. To issue a direction commanding the respondent no.2 to provide compassionate appointment to the applicant.

III. To issue any other order or direction as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and to allow this application with cost.”

2. Looking to the pleadings of both parties and the order dated 21.03.2013 passed in Succession Case No.81/2011 by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) Jhansi (Annexure A-6) and the Judgment dated 18.09.2017 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division) Jhansi in Civil Suit No.694/2013 (Annexure A-9) and also looking to the all documents, submitted by the parties, it can be said that the following facts are admitted facts :-

(a) Suresh Chandra Sharma was appointed as T & C Fitter vide order dated 29.09.1979 and he joined his service on 03.10.1979. After getting some promotion, he was working as T & C Fitter Grade-I and passed away/expired during his service tenure on 18.02.2011.

(b) The deceased employee-Suresh Chandra Sharma was married with Sneh Lata Sharma on 20.02.1981.

(c) The applicant is the daughter of Deep Shikha Sharma and the marriage of Deep Shikha Sharma with the deceased employee-Suresh Chandra Sharma was not proved in the Succession case as well as Civil Suit.

(d) The applicant is the daughter of Deep Shikha Sharma and Late Suresh Chandra Sharma.

3. As per applicant’s case, after the death of her father she filed the application for compassionate appointment, but the respondents did not grant the compassionate appointment and rejected her claim. She again filed the claim, after the decision of the Civil Suit. But the respondents again dismissed her claim by the impugned order. Therefore, she filed this OA. As per applicant, being a daughter of second wife, she was entitled to get the compassionate appointment. But the respondents illegally rejected her claim.

4. On the other side, the respondents opposed the claim of the applicant and submitted that she was not entitled to get the compassionate appointment. It was not proved that the mother of applicant solemnized the marriage with the deceased employee. She was not the legal wife of deceased employee Suresh Chandra Sharma.

5. Admittedly the deceased-Suresh Chandra Sharma expired on 18.02.2011. As per applicant’s pleading in Para No.4.5, after the death of her father the applicant’s mother immediately wrote a letter dated 11.03.2011 and 13.04.2011 for providing the payment and compassionate appointment. In Para No. 4.6, it is also mentioned that when the information was not received, then the mother seeks the information under RTI Act vide Annexure A-5.

7. Succession Suit No.81/2011 was filed in the year, 2011 by applicant-Pragati Sharma and the aforesaid suit was decided on 21.03.2013 vide Annexure A-6 by Civil Judge (Senior Division) Jhansi. As per pleadings of the applicant she filed an application for compassionate appointment (Annexure A-7) on 19.08.2013 by registered post. Annexure A-7 shows that the aforesaid application was filed by Pragati Sharma through registered post