SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 2837

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Hemant Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Chief Post Master General Up Circle – Respondent
O.A./462/2015



(Reserved on 06.02.2026)

Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench Allahabad ****

Original Application No. 462/2015 This is the 19th Day of February 2026 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Joshi, Member (Judicial)

Hemant Kumar son of Late Rajendra Singh, Resident of House No.533/16, Mohalla Devipura-I, Bulandshahr.

………..Applicant By Advocate: Shri B.N. Singh Versus

1. Union of India through Secretary, Post and Telegraph, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

2. The Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow.

3. Asstt. Director, (Recruitment), U.P. Circle, Lucknow.

4. Superintendent of Post Offices, Bulandshahar.

……… Respondents By Advocate: Shri Krishna Kumar Ojha

O R D E R

Heard Shri Babu Nandan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Krishna Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following main relief(s):-

“(i) to issue an order or direction quashing the impugned order dated

05.02.2010 passed by respondent No.3 (Annexure No.1) to this O.A.

(ii) to issue an order or direction to respondents directing them to give the employment to applicant in the concerned department under dying in harness scheme.”

3. The brief facts of the case, as per the applicant, are as follows:-

3.1 The father of the applicant, Late Rajendra Singh, was working as a Packer (Class-IV/Group ‘D’ employee) in the Head Post Office, Bulandshahar, under the Department of Posts. He was a permanent employee of the Department and died in harness on 06.07.2003. After his demise, the family was left without any regular source of income.

3.2 Subsequently, Smt. Maya Devi, wife of the deceased employee and mother of the applicant, submitted an application seeking compassionate appointment for her son under the compassionate ground. The Superintendent of Post Offices, Bulandshahar, vide letters dated 09.09.2004 and 27.10.2004, required information regarding the share in village land and income arising therefrom. In response, the family submitted the requisite information and valuation certificate of property dated 06.07.2006. Several reminders and representations were also submitted by Smt. Maya Devi on 04.04.2005, 09.08.2008 and 22.09.2008 requesting consideration of the claim.

3.3 The applicant himself submitted an application dated 30.05.2009 to the Superintendent of Post Offices, Bulandshahar, along with his educational certificates (High School and Intermediate mark sheets). The respondents, vide letter dated 04.10.2008, informed that the matter was under consideration. However, no final decision was communicated for a considerable period.

3.4 Eventually, respondent no. 3 passed the impugned order dated 05.02.2010 rejecting the claim of the applicant for compassionate appointment on the ground that vacancies under the prescribed ceiling limit were limited and it is not possible to make appointment on compassionate grounds. The said rejection was communicated to the applicant vide letter dated 10.03.2010.

3.5 Thereafter, the applicant had approached the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad by filing Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 26148 of

2010, which was dismissed on 27.11.2014 with liberty to pursue the remedy before this Tribunal.

3.6 The applicant thereafter submitted an application dated 21.02.2014 under the Right to Information Act seeking details regarding the number of applications received and the number of appointments made on compassionate grounds during the relevant period. However, the department, vide letter dated 13.03.2014, replied that no such information was available. The said reply, according to the applicant, further demonstrates lack of transparency and non-maintenance of relevant records in the matter. Having no other efficacious alternative remedy, the applicant has now approached this Tribunal by filing the present Original Application seeking appropriate relief.

4. Counter Affidavit has been file form the side of the resp

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top