Narendra Singh Umath vs State of M.P. and Others

N.K. Mody, J.—Prayer in the petition is to allow the petition and to quash order dated 15/02/2008 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No. 1 whereby the application filed by the petitioner for compassionate appointment was rejected and to direct respondents to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Hardayal Singh was the father of the petitioner and was working as Assistant teacher who died on 13/02/1998 when the petitioner was minor. It is submitted that after attaining majority the petitioner moved an application on 10/12/2007 for compassionate appointment which was dismissed vide Annexure P/1 on the ground that as per clause 7.1 of the circular after attaining majority the application filed by the petitioner is barred by time. It is submitted that impugned order Annexure P/1 deserves to be set aside. Learned counsel submits that on 13/02/1998 petitioner was of 9 years and 7 months of age. It is submitted that after attaining the age immediately the application was filed, therefore, it should not have rejected on the ground that the application is barred by time. It is submitted that petition be allowed and Annexure P/l be quashed. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that as per clause 7.1 of the Circular dated 22/01/2007, the application can be filed by a person who is dependent on the deceased if he has become major within a period of seven years from the date of death. Learned counsel submits that since the petitioner attains the age of majority on 4/07/2006 which is after 7 years of the death of Hardayal Singh, therefore, the application has rightly been dismissed. It is submitted that petition be dismissed.

Undisputely Hardayal Singh died on 13/02/1998 and the date of birth of the petitioner is 4/07/1988. At the time of death of Hardayal Singh, the age of the petitioner Narendra Singh was 9 years and 7 months. The application is filed on 10/12/2007 and the circular which is placed on record is dated 22/01/2007 while circular for compassionate appointment ought to have been taken into consideration which was in force at the time of death of Hardayal which is dated 10/6/1994. Clause 7.1 of the Circular dated reads asunder:-

While clause 5 of Circular dated 10/06/1994 which was in force at the time of death of Hardayal Singh reads as under:

In the matter of Ashok Kumar vs. Union of India and Others in which father of the applicant died in 1988 and new policy was introduced in the year 1990. Division bench of Central Administrative Tribunal Bench at Jabalur has directed to consider the age of compassionate appointment as per policy which was in existence at the relevant time. In the matter of Govind Prasad Vs. R.G. Parsad and Others, wherein Hon''ble Apex Court has held that the executive order of the Government cannot be made operative with retrospective effect..

Keeping in view the aforesaid position of law, this court is of the view that order Annexure P/1 cannot be allowed to sustain. Hence, petition filed by the petitioner is allowed and Annexure P/l is quashed with a direction to the petitioner to file fresh application narrating full facts about the status of each member of the family of the petitioner and also the amount of family pension received on account of death of Hardayal If such application is filed supported with documents and the relevant case law then after affording an opportunity of hearing, the respondent No. 1 shall decide the application afresh keeping in view the policy which was in existence at the time of death of Hardayal Singh. Needful be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the application. With the aforesaid the petition stands disposed of.

No order as to costs.