Dependents entitled to compassionate appointment despite deceased employee's abated criminal case and dropped enquiry; presumption of innocence applies, no vicarious disqualification without proven guilt.

O R D E R

Hon’ble Mr. Rajinder Kashyap, Member (A):

By filing the instant OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant is seeking the following reliefs:-

"a) Quash and set aside the impugned orders dated 03/04/2019, 14/02/2017, 23/05/2017 and 12/01/2018 including impugned note under clause 4 standing order 39/2018 placed at Annexure A/1, A/2, A/3, A/4 and A/5 respectively.

b) Direct the respondents to consider the claim of the applicant for appointment on compassionate grounds.

c) Accord all consequential benefits.

d) Award costs of the proceedings; and e) To pass any order/relief/direction(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interests of justice in favour of the applicant."

FACTS OF THE CASE

2. The facts, as stated by the applicant, are that :

2.1 The father of the applicant, namely, Subhash Chand, who was working as Head Constable in Delhi Police, unfortunately expired on 16.10.2012 while in service. Due to sudden death of his father, the applicant's entire family came under financial crisis; therefore, the respondents were requested to consider the claim of applicant for appointment on compassionate grounds. In the said representation, the applicant explained that the deceased employee, namely H.C. Subhash Chand, left behind widow, 2 (two) unmarried daughters and 1(one) minor son without any financial source of income. It was also stated that due to sudden death of only earning member in the family, it became difficult for the family to meet both ends.

2.2 On 29.08.2013, the concerned officials heard the applicant's family genuine grievances and assured for positive action. However, no positive decision was taken and vide letter dated 29.08.2013 (Annexure A/6), the applicant's mother, namely, Sunesh Devi, was advised to submit application for appointment of his son, i.e., applicant on attaining the age of 18 years.

2.3 In January 2016, as the applicant's family financial condition was deteriorating day by day, therefore, the applicant immediately on attaining of 18 years applied for considering his claim for appointment on compassionate grounds as per rules and the procedure prescribed by the respondents vide Standing Order No. 39/14 (Annexure A/7).

2.4 The said request of the applicant was considered by the respondents, however, details of aforesaid consideration was not provided to the applicant as evident from impugned letter dated 14.02.2017 (Annexure A/3). A perusal of said letter would show that except stating that the case of applicant was found not covered under the criteria prescribed in DOP&T instructions and Standing Order No.39/14, no reasons have been recorded.

2.5 Being aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the respondents, the applicant's mother submitted another detailed representation dated 27.04.2017 to the respondents for considering claim of applicant for appointment on compassionate grounds. However, the respondents have rejected the aforesaid representation by taking a new plea as evident from impugned letter dated 23.05.2017 (Annexure A/4) wherein it has been stated that the applicant cannot be granted appointment on compassionate grounds inasmuch as, Late H.C Subhash Chand was facing FIR No. 442/2017, u/s 409, 420 & 411.

2.6 As the reasons recorded in the aforesaid rejection letter were contrary to rules and the law on the subject, therefore, the applicant's mothe