CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH [Reserved]

Original Application No. 43/357/2023 Reserved on: 04.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 20.02.2026 HON’BLE MR. SANJIV KUMAR, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER Between Balking Ch. Marak, aged about 36 years, S/o Late Modison J. Sangma, Resident of Nogapara/Garobadha, West Garo Hills, Meghalaya, Pin – 794105. ....Applicant -And-

1. The Union of India, Represented by Secretary to the Ministry of Communications, Department of Post, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi – 110001.

2. The Chief Post Master General North East Circle, Shillong, Pin – 793001.

3. The Assistant Postmaster General(Staff), Office of the Chief Postmaster General, N E Circle, Shillong – 793001.

4. Sr. Superintendent of Post Officers, Meghalaya Division, Shillong – 793001.

5. Circle Relaxation Committee, Represented by the Respondent No. 4, Meghalaya Division, Shillong – 793001.

……. Respondents Advocate for applicant: Sri S.P. Bhattachargee, Sri R.K. Saha Sri B. Chakraborty, Advocate for respondent(s): Sri S.K. Ghosh, Addl. CGSC ORDER PER MR. SANJIV KUMAR, MEMBER (A):

This Original Application (OA) is made against the impugned Order dated 20.12.2021, whereby the claim of the applicant for compassionate appointment was rejected by the respondents(Annexure-A/1). According to the applicant, he applied for compassionate appointment on 25.02.2011 following the premature demise of his father on 14.11.2010 and his case was deferred from 2011 to 2020, and ultimately rejected without any stated reason.

2. The applicant has filed this OA seeking a direction to the respondents to consider his case for compassionate appointment and select him in accordance with the guidelines prevailing at the time of his father’s death.

3. As in OA, the case of the applicant was earlier considered in 2015 and 2017, and he was informed that due to limited vacancy, his case will be carry forwarded for consideration in line with 2015, 2016-17 and 2017-18 cases vide Letter dated 17.11.2015(Annexures-A/5), 10.01.2017(Annexure-A/6), 20.10.2017(Annexure-A/7). The grievance of the applicant is that his case was kept pending since 2011 onwards, and no action was taken by the respondent authorities to grant him appointment and finally his case was rejected by the Circle Relaxation Committee vide Letter dated 20.12.2021(Annexure-

A/1).

4. In their reply, the respondents have stated that the applicant’s case was duly considered and rejected by the Circle Relaxation Committee, which met on 27.07.2021. The Committee considered 57 cases and recommended 02 cases for appointment, 20 cases were deferred and 35 cases were recommended for rejection(Annexure-R/2). The case of the applicant was one of the 35 cases recommended for rejection including some 12 years’ old cases and there is no illegality or irrationality in the rejection. The respondents further stated that no meetings of the Circle Relaxation Committee were held in the years 2011-12, 2013-14, 2018-19 and 2020 due to administrative reasons. Orders were, however, issued based on the Committee’s recommendations for the years 2015-16 and 2017. The applicant’s case could not be considered within the 5% limit of vacancies available in Group- C posts of Multi-Tasking Staff(MTS), for which he was eligible.

5. The respondents have also stated that there is no provision in the relevant government instructions for intimating the reasons recorded by the relaxation committee for rejection of the candidates and non-intimation of the reasons per se do not constitute him right to be considered as it is clear from the order that his case was considered along with others and was rejected on merit.

6. The applicant has referred to the case of Smt. Beena Gurung, whose husband died on 22.07.2020(later than the applicant’s father), yet she was appointed. The respondents have clarified that the applicant scored 60 marks out of the total under the relative merit point system, whereas Smt. Beena Gurung scored 93 marks. Moreover, Smt. Beena Gurung was consi