Noorain Ansari vs Union Of India & Ors

Mohan Pyare, Member (A)

By means of the present Original Application, the applicant prays for the following reliefs:

“ i) The Hon’ble Court may be pleased to directing to the concerned authorities to appoint to the applicant as compassionate ground according to his qualification by considering his financial crises.

ii) Hon’ble court may be pleased to pass appropriate order which deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case and award cost of petition in favour of applicant.”

The brief facts of the case are that the father of the applicant Late Abdul Aziz Bharati, posted as Security Guard in IVRI, Ijjat Nagar, Bareilly, expired on 27.07.2006 leaving behind his widow Smt. Zohara Bano and three sons namely, (i) Anwar Ali, (ii) Asrar Ahmad and (iii) Noorain Ansari (applicant). At the time of the death of the father of the applicant, two brothers Mr. Anwar Ali and Mr. Asrar Ahmad were living separately from their mother and were daily wage earners. The applicant was living with his mother and submitted an application dated 18.09.2006 (Annexure A-2) for compassionate ground appointment. The Assistant Administrative Officer (P.I.M.S.) informed the mother of the applicant that appointment on compassionate ground to her son is under consideration (Annexure A-3). In the meanwhile, Shri Himanshu Sharma was offered a letter of appointment on compassionate grounds. In response to the representation before the competent authority, two letters dated 23.08.2011 and 21.10.20211 were sent to the mother of the applicant mentioning that the appointment of her son is being considered by the concerned authority and decision will be communicated early (Annexure A-5, A-6, A-7, A-8 and A-9). The Assistant Administrative Officer vide order dated 26.08.2013 had directed the applicant to submit his particulars in the prescribed performa (Annexure A-10). The same was again submitted by the applicant. Meanwhile I.C.A.R. had issued appointments to other candidates vide their letter dated 20.05.2015 leaving the claim of the applicant. The mother of the applicant again submitted a representation dated 10.01.2016 asking for sympathetic consideration and to appoint the applicant on compassionate grounds. An order dated 24.01.2018 (Annexure A-13) was also issued appointing 18 dependents ignoring the claim of the applicant which, he claims, is not just and proper. The applicant claims that he is eligible and qualified to be appointed on compassionate grounds and rejection of his claim is discriminatory and contrary to the provisions of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

In their counter affidavit, the respondents have submitted that the application of Shri Noorain Ansari was put up before the Committee meeting for consideration and his name did not come in the merit and the applicant/ mother of the applicant was informed that the claim of the applicant will be put up before the Compassionate Appointment Committee in future and the outcome of the same will be communicated to her. Based on the consideration of the competent committee held on 12.02.2014, 21.02.2014 and 03.04.2014, the Committee decided that the case of the applicant does not have merit as per Government of India circular and should not be carried forward for future consideration. The objective of granting compassionate appointment is to enable the family of the deceased to tide over the sudden crisis and to relieve the family of the deceased from financial destitution. On the above considerations, the O.A. of the applicant is devoid of any merit and should be dismissed.

In the rejoinder, the applicant has almost produced that same facts which is mentioned in the O.A. and has submitted that this Tribunal may direct the respondents to consider his claim and appoint him on compassionate ground.

Heard both the counsels and gone through the records submitted by both the parties.

During the argument, counsel for the applicant stated that the representation dated 10.01.2016 submitted by the applicant has not been considered and decided by the respondents and requested that the competent authority/ respondents should be directed to consider the above representation. It is felt reasonable that the above representation of the applicant should be considered by the respondents/ competent authority. Accordingly, the competent authority amongst the respondents is directed to consider the representation of the application dated 10.01.2016 on the basis of the existing rules/ regulations and pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

With the above directions, the O.A. is disposed of. No costs.