CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL JAMMU BENCH Transfer Application No. 6453/2021 (WPC No. 167/2020)

Date of Order: This, the 28th day of November, 2025 HON’BLE MR. RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Between Sunny Sharma, aged 28 years, S/o Late Om Prakash Mate FGM R/o Singh Pura, Near Kashmiri Basti, P.O. Miran Sahib, Tehsil: R.S. Pura, District Jammu (J&K).

…..Applicant -VERSUS-

1. Union of India, Through Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India, 2. The E-in-C’s Branch, IHQ of MoD(Army), Kashmir House, Raja ji Marg, DHQ PO, New Delhi – 110011.

3. Chief Engineer, Western Command, Chandimandir Cantt, Panchkula, Haryana, Pin – 134107.

4. Headquarters, Chief Engineer, Pathankot Zone – 145001.

5. Major, Garrison Engineer, Jammu.

…Respondents Advocate for applicant(s): Mr. Sudershan Sharma Advocate for respondent(s): Mr. Raghu Mehta, ld. Sr. CGSC ORDER(ORAL)

PER MR. RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, MEMBER (J):

The WP(C) No. 167/2020 was transferred from the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu and is now registered and listed as T.A. No. 61/6453/2021 by the Registry of this Tribunal.

2. At the outset, M.A. Nos. 1668/2025 & 1598/2025 are filed by the petitioner for a direction upon the respondents to produce the relevant records at the time of hearing.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents has today produced the records.

4. Considering the above, both M.A. Nos. 1668/2025 &

1598/2025 are disposed of.

5. The instant application has been filed by the applicant praying for the following relief(s):

“a. Certiorari, seeking to quash speaking order dated 08.03.2013 issued by respondent No.4 whereby the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was considered for the year 2011-12 and was arbitrarily rejected.

b. Certiorari, seeking to quash speaking order dated 13.02.2014 issued by respondent No.4 whereby the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was considered for the year 2012-13 and was arbitrarily rejected.

c. Certiorari, seeking to quash speaking order dated 07.09.2016 issued by respondent No.4 whereby the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was considered for the year 2013-14 and was arbitrarily rejected.

d. Certiorari, seeking to quash speaking order dated 11.07.2019 issued by respondent No. 4 whereby the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was considered for the year 2015-16 and was arbitrarily rejected.

e. Mandamus, commanding the respondents to produce the entire record for the board proceedings for the years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16.

f. Mandamus, commanding the respondents to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground on a suitable post w.e.f the date the last selected candidate in the board proceedings for the year 2011-12 has been appointed, with all consequential benefits.

Cost of the petition with such other additional or alternate relief as this Hon'ble court may, deem fit and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be kindly awarded.”

6. The facts of the case are that the father of the applicant came to be appointed in the office of respondents on 07.12.1979 and he died in harness on 08.11.2009 leaving behind wife, one son and two unmarried daughters. Thereafter, his son had applied for compassionate appointment in 2011. His case was considered, however, the same was rejected on the ground that he failed to reach the cut off marks in the merit list. It has been further submitted that the respondents have considered Rs. 7033/- per month as income of the family of the deceased. But as per the Policy dated 22.01.2010 with regard to compassionate appointment, it has been stated inter-alia that: “After the implementation of the 6th Central Pay Commission recommendations, the point allotted to various aspects i.e. family pension and terminal benefits, etc have become redundant.” However, the income of the petitioner was wrongly calculated by the respondents as he was given ‘0’ points against the column ‘Monthly Income of earning members