Compassionate appointment upheld despite technical objections when dependence and widow consent proven; rejection quashed for arbitrariness and delay.

ORDER

Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member

1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs: -

a) Quash the impugned rejection Order No. 551 OF 2025 issued vide Communication no. Pers-A-05/2018/1316-19 dated 13-02-2025.

b) Direct the Respondents to appoint the Applicant on compassionate grounds in terms of:

(i) SRO-43 of 1994 or in the alternative

(ii) S.O 429 i.e., Jammu and Kashmir Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme,2022 with effect from the date the Applicant became eligible and Respondents received the application for appointment, and with consequential service benefits.

c) Pass any such order or orders which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit.

2. The facts of the case as averred by the applicant in his pleadings, are as follows: -

a) The applicant, a permanent resident of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, has invoked the jurisdiction of this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking compassionate appointment on account of the untimely death of his real brother, Late Shri Vinod Singh, who was serving as a Selection Grade Constable in the Jammu and Kashmir Police and died in harness on 23.09.2017. The deceased was the sole earning member of the family, and his death rendered the family destitute and without any assured means of livelihood.

b) Soon after the demise of the deceased employee, the applicant, being a dependent family member within the meaning of SRO- 43 of 1994, approached the respondent authorities and submitted his claim for compassionate appointment. The widow of the deceased employee also supported the claim of the applicant by furnishing affidavits and representations, unequivocally expressing her consent and requesting that the applicant be appointed in order to sustain the family. The case of the applicant was thus duly sponsored and processed by the department under the compassionate appointment scheme.

c) During the course of processing, the respondent authorities themselves acknowledged that the applicant had crossed the upper age limit for the post of Constable and, accordingly, vide communication dated 08.09.2022, recommended his case for appointment to the post of Follower in the Jammu and Kashmir Police. The applicant was specifically asked to submit an affidavit conveying his willingness for the said post and to clarify certain ancillary issues. The applicant complied with all such directions promptly and submitted the requisite affidavit and representations, thereby conveying his unequivocal willingness to accept appointment as a Follower.

d) Despite the applicant having fulfilled every requirement as demanded by the respondents from time to time and despite the case having been under active consideration since the year 2017, the respondents failed to issue an appointment order. Instead, the applicant was subjected to repeated and successive queries, resulting in inordinate delay, which defeated the very object of compassionate appointment. Even the widow of the deceased employee repeatedly approached the authorities, clarified all doubts, and reiterated her request for appointment of the applicant, yet no final decision was taken.

e) Aggrieved by the unexplained delay, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 833/2024. This Tribunal, vide order dated 08.08.2024, disposed of the said Original Application with a specific direction to the respondents to treat the OA as a representation and to consider the case of the applicant in light of the recommendations of the Director General of Police and rele