Compassionate appointments confer moral responsibilities, and neglecting dependent obligations undermines the underlying purpose of the appointment.

ORDER :

1. The instant Civil Writ Petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking appropriate directions to respondent Nos.1 to 3 to ensure compliance with the legal and moral obligation of respondent No.4, who is the wife of the petitioner’s deceased son, Late Rajesh Kumar, to maintain and look after the family members of her husband. It has further been prayed that, in the event of respondent No.4 failing to discharge such obligation and to take care of the welfare of the petitioner’s family, respondent Nos.1 to 3 may kindly be directed to deduct fifty percent of the salary of respondent No.4 and deposit the same in the bank account of the petitioner, so as to enable him to maintain and support the dependent family members.

2. The facts, in brief, giving rise to the present writ petition are that the son of the petitioner late Rajesh Kumar, was employed as a Technical Assistant under the control of the respondent–Department (non-petitioners Nos.1 to 3). It is an admitted position that said Rajesh Kumar expired while in service on 15.09.2015. Consequent upon his demise, the respondent–Department issued a letter dated 21.09.2015, calling upon the petitioner to submit an application for compassionate appointment in accordance with the provisions of the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996 (for short, the Rules of 1996). Thereafter, by another letter dated 26.09.2015, the petitioner was informed that his name had been nominated for consideration under the said Rules and he was directed to complete the requisite formalities. It appears that the respondent No.4 Smt. Shashi Kumari, wife of the deceased employee Rajesh Kumar, also submitted an application seeking compassionate appointment. It is clearly discernible from the record that an offer of appointment on compassionate grounds was extended to the petitioner in recognition of the services of the deceased employee. However, the petitioner, demonstrating an apparent sense of magnanimity and selflessness, or perhaps for reasons best known to him, voluntarily recommended that the said compassionate appointment be conferred upon his daughter- in-law in his place.

3. It further emerges that, subsequent to the aforesaid recommendation, for reasons that remain obscure and unexplained, a rift or strain appears to have developed between the petitioner and respondent No.

4. This deterioration in relations seemingly prompted the petitioner to address a formal communication to the authorities, the tenor and purport of which suggest that it was occasioned by the said interpersonal discord. He addressed a letter dated 15.10.2015 to the Chairman, Municipal Board, Kherli Khatumar, District Alwar, stating that respondent No.4 was residing with her parents and had severed relations with the petitioner and his family. Upon such representation, the Chairman of the Municipal Board conducted an inquiry and submitted a report affirming that the petitioner, being an aged person, had no independent source of income and was facing acute financial hardship. The said report further recorded that respondent No.4 had left the matrimonial home within eighteen days of her husband’s demise and was living with her parents, thereby failing to maintain her in- laws. The said report, supported by local residents.

4.1 Despite the aforesaid factual position, the Superintending Engineer, AVVNL, vide order dated 11.03.2016, appointed res