P.T.Santha & Others vs Union Of India & Others

K.V. Eapen, Member A

The applicants have filed the O.A seeking the following main reliefs:-

“1. To call for the records leading to issuance of Annexures A5 and A7 and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and discriminatory;

To direct Respondents to appoint the 2nd respondent in the services of the respondents on compassionate grounds in terms of the mandate of the applicable laws;

In the alternative, to direct the respondents to process the claim in accordance with the scheme for compassionate appointment and the procedure laid down thereunder by assessing the financial condition of the family; and

To grant such other relief as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit to grant.”

Brief facts of the case is as follows:

The husband of the 1st applicant entered the services of the respondents on 25.11.1998 and while working as Track Man in the Palakkad Division, passed away on 17.02.2011. The 1st applicant made an application to the respondents for appointment of her daughter-the 2nd applicant, in the service of the respondents on compassionate grounds, stating that, the 2nd applicant is living with the 1st applicant and neither of them have any source of income for living. The said application was rejected by the respondents citing Annexure A-8 circular of the Railway Board that a married daughter would be eligible for compassionate appointment, only if the General Manager was satisfied that she would be the sole bread winner for the bereaved family. The 1st applicant had made the request on the expectation that her married daughter would take care of the family comprising of herself and the two minor children of the 2nd applicant. However, the claim was rejected by the respondents on the ground that the daughter was married and no dependency was established.

Heard both sides.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that there has been change in the circumstances of the 2nd applicant as she has now got divorced and is now living with the mother, the 1st applicant and with her two minor children. Hence, the situation that appeared earlier has been changed. She is the sole bread winner for her children and mother. She has accordingly made another representation, which has been produced as Annexure-A9 and has submitted the same before the respondents. She will be satisfied in case the respondents consider the representation in the light of the new facts and circumstances and pass necessary orders on her claim for compassionate appointment.

Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the representation be considered in accordance with the Rules relating to the matter of compassionate appointment.

Hence, the matter is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider Annexure-A9 representation in the changed circumstances of the case and take a decision on the claim relating to the application for compassionate appointment made by the applicants. This should be done within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order by way of a speaking order. The O.A is disposed of as above. No order as to costs.

(Dated, 12th July, 2022.)