Administrative authorities must provide reasoned, non-cryptic orders for the denial of compassionate appointments and must substantively consider all applicable relaxation guidelines and factual evidence, such as the applicant's financial status and educational qualification trainee schemes, to avoid arbitrary decision-making.

ORAL ORDER

(As per Hon’ble Mr. Varun Sindhu Kul Kaumudi, Administrative Member)

By this Original Application, the applicant is seeking the following relief:

“This Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to to call for the records leading to passing of the proceedings No.271/Rectt.-2022 dt.22-11-2023 of the 4th Respondent in rejecting his case for appointment on compassionate grounds consequent on the death of his father while in service and declare the same as illegal, arbitrary, bad in law, violative of Art. 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and instructions of the Respondents and consequently by setting aside the same, direct the Respondents to appoint the applicant in any suitable post on compassionate grounds and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. The brief facts of the case, as stated by the applicant, are that the applicant’s father joined the Respondent Organisation, on 27.09.1983, and died on 30.08.2016, while working as a Daftari (ACP). The applicant is the eldest son of the deceased employee. The applicant and his mother submitted representation(s), dated 21.12.2016, 06.03.2017 & 29.11.2018, to the 3rd Respondent, seeking his appointment on compassionate grounds. After perusal of the applicant’s case, for grant of compassionate ground appointment, the Compassionate Appointment Committee, in its meeting, dated 23.03.2018, rejected the applicant’s case for want of requisite educational qualification. The rejection was communicated to the applicant, vide letter, dated 15.02.2019. Thereafter, the applicant, having obtained the matriculation certificate, in 2020, submitted another application, dated 22.06.2021, for reconsideration, and the 4th Respondent, vide proceedings, dated 22.11.2023, rejected the applicant’s case, in a cryptic manner citing no reasons thereof. Consequently, the applicant submitted representation(s), dated 05.12.2023 and 27.01.2024, to the 3rd Respondent, for re-consideration of his case for appointment on compassionate grounds. Aggrieved with the arbitrary rejection of his case, the applicant filed the present O.A.

3. After notice, respondents have appeared through their counsel, filed a reply and opposed the relief on the ground that the applicant’s family consists of his mother and four brothers, aged 27, 24, 22 and 19 years, and that the family received DCRG amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- as also family pension of Rs. 15,984/-. Further, compassionate appointment cannot be claimed as matter of right and in view of the limited vacancies, the Committee, after objectively reviewing the applicant’s case, has rightfully exercised its discretion, based on individual circumstances as well as relative merit.

4. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the respondents’ counsel has drawn attention to the proceedings, dt. 23.03.2018, of the Committee on Compassionate Appointments (CCA), whereby the case of the applicant has been rejected in the year 2018, on the ground that he did not possess the requisite educational qualification, i.e., 10th class. Further, as per the proceedings, dt. 19th July, 2022, of the CCA, old cases, including that of the applicant, were closed. The learned counsel for the respondents argues that the applicant has not challenged the proceedings of the CCA. A close reading of the proceedings of the meeting of the CCA, held on 19.07.2022, shows that, practically, no decision has been taken regar