Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench

Kshatriya Prasad vs Union Of India & Ors

Central Administrative Tribunal · Decided on 11 November 2022 · Citation: (2022) 11 CAT CK 0028

HON’BLE JUDGES
Om Prakash VII, Member (J)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Original Application No. 330, 00874 Of 2015
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 386 words

Om Prakash VII, Member (J)

1.

Shri O.P. Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri V.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the respondents are present.

2.

By this original application, the applicant seeks the following reliefs :-

“ (i) To direct the respondents to consider the candidature of applicant also, for the compassionate appointment at par with those candidates whose names were below the applicant in the priority list dated 16.01.2014/08.05.2015 and have already been appointed in the month of May & June 2015. In case, he is found suitable for compassionate appointment, he may also be offered appointment against any available post as per his qualification at any place as early as possible.

Any other order or direction which may be fit under the circumstances of present case may also be passed.”

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant states that one post has been kept vacant in this matter vide order dated 03.07.2015 which is still lying vacant.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that his grievance may be redressed if a direction is given to the department concerned to consider the prayer of the applicant for compassionate appointment on the vacant post within a time bound manner. Learned counsel for the applicant further states that department concerned had also assured the applicant to consider his candidature as and when the post is available. Since one post is kept vacant, the department concerned may be directed to consider the case of the applicant for compassionate appointment.

5.

Learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently opposed the prayer of the applicant.

6.

I have considered the rival submissions and gone through the entire record.

7.

However, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant, no fruitful purpose will be served in keeping this O.A. Accordingly, the competent authority amongst the respondents is directed to consider and decide the representations dated 24.09.2009, 21.11.2010 and 25.11.2010 said to be pending for compassionate appointment of the applicant before them by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The order so passed shall be communicated to the applicant without any delay.

8.

With the above direction, the OA is disposed of. No order as to costs.