Parveen vs Director and Another

Valmiki J Mehta, J.—This writ petition is filed by one Sh. Parveen, son of late Sh. Bishan Saroop who was an employee of the respondent no. 1. Petitioner claims compassionate appointment as his father late Sh. Bishan Saroop died in harness on 30.1.2008 at the age of 54 years. A reference to the petition shows that the mother of the petitioner had earlier applied for compassionate appointment, her case was considered on merits, and the case was rejected in the years 2008 and 2010. Petitioner-son now claims compassionate appointment and challenges the rejection order dated 22.11.2012.

Counter affidavit filed by the respondent no. 1 shows that various points are allocated under different heads for entitlement to compassionate appointment, and as per the point system which has been applied, petitioner does not meet the criteria. The allocation of points is as per the Memorandums dated 22.1.2010 and 14.5.2010 which have been filed at pages 46 to 48 of the counter-affidavit.

In view of the above, the following order was passed with respect to the petitioner on 3.6.2009:-

DOP/09/95042/P/02 03 Jun 2009

The Director

ISSA

Delhi

REQUEST FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT: SH. PARVEEN KUMAR S/O. LATE SH. BISHAN SAROOP, ALS ''B''

Reference your letter number ISSA/400/49/Admin dated 20 May 2009.

As already clarified the case for appointment of Sh. Parveen Kumar s/o. Late sh. Bishan Saroop on compassionate grounds has been considered and decided by the Compassionate Appointment Committee chaired by CC R&D (LS & HR) & DS on the basis of information provided by the lab. Also, the lab would be aware, the merit of the case for appointment on compassionate grounds is ascertained on the basis of the points scored by the case in the 100 points scale. Maximum the number of points the higher the chances. Needless to say, a case where the assets are less and the liabilities are more as per the factors given in the 100 points scheme will get more benefic points. In the case of Sh. Parveen Kumar if the additional GPf disbursal is factored the number of points scored by the case would further come down.

Even on the basis of taking Rs. 82,408/- as GPF disbursal (instead of the actual Rs. 1,48,469/-) the case has not been able to come up on merit.

It is seen that Late Sh. Bishan Saroop died in harness on 30.1.2008 and the case was processed to HQs in the month of June 2008. During the intervening period the lab had adequate time to get all the facts that have a bearing in the matter checked, before submission to HQs.

Notwithstanding, the above there appears no scope for reconsideration of the case based on the points obtained by it, on inter-se-merit.

(Shyamala Parsheera)

Assistant Director (Pers)

for Director General Research & Development

A compassionate appointment is not a matter of right but the same can only be in accordance with the applicable scheme/policy. A person who seeks compassionate appointment must satisfy the requirements of the scheme. Petitioner does not satisfy the requirements of the scheme as he does not reach the cut-off point for getting compassionate appointment. One of the objects of compassionate appointment is to ensure that persons who are most deserving and who otherwise not have financial means should get compassionate appointment. As stated in the counter-affidavit on account of the death of the father of the petitioner Sh. Bishan Saroop, the following terminal benefits were paid to the family:

The father of the Petitioner, Sh. Bishan Saroop, Ex-ALS ''B'' died on 30-01-2008 at the age of 54 during service. After his death the following terminal benefits/emoluments have been paid to his family.

(i) Family Pension-Rs. 2,527/- p.m. + Dearness Relief @ 47% i.e. Rs. 1,187/- w.e.f. 31-01-08 (which has been increased to Rs. 4,090/-(after implementation of sixth pay commission)+Dearness relief thereon as per the appendix ''A''). The family pension is Rs. 4090 + DR Rs. 3272 @ 80% of family pension w.e.f. 01-01-2013.

(ii) Death Cum Retirement Gratuity (DCRG)-Rs. 1,09,944/-

(iii) Central Govt. Employees Group Insurance Scheme (CGEGIS)-Rs. 19,927/-.

(iv) General Provident Fund (GPF)-Rs. 1,48,469/-

(v) Leave encashment-Rs. 15,270/-

In view of the above, it is clear that petitioner is not entitled to compassionate appointment as the petitioner does not meet the eligibility criteria as per the scheme. Also, the family received such monetary amounts that it cannot be said to be living in penury for being entitled to compassionate appointment. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.