Raj Pal vs Union Of India And Ors

By this OA the applicant has sought compassionate appointment on the ground that the father of the applicant died in the year 1991 while serving with the respondents. The applicant at that point of time was 15 years old. He applied for compassionate appointment for the first time in 15.11.1995 and later on 25.11.1998 after becoming an adult. His case for compassionate appointment was considered and rejected by the Board of officers on 11.09.1999, on the ground that the applicant did not possess the minimum educational qualification for the post of Mazdoor, which is 8th class pass. Thereafter, the applicant sought compassionate appointment to the post of Chowkidar, which was also not considered because of lack of the educational qualification. Third time, the applicant sought compassionate appointment to the post of Safaiwala vide application dated 06.07.2001, which was not acceded to by the competent authority as no liability was left behind by the deceased employee on the shoulders of his two sons except their own livelihood. The mother of the applicant had pre-deceased his father. The elder brother of the applicant also expired leaving behind three children alleged to be maintained by the applicant. This however was not considered as the liability of the deceased government servant.

On going through the facts of the case I find that the father of the applicant died 27 years ago. The scheme of compassionate applointment has been introduced by the Government of India to provide immediate financial assistance to the family of the deceased government employee to overcome the financial crisis, after the death of sole bread earner.

The applicant's case has to be considered as per the guidelines and spirit on account of which this Policy was framed. The family of the deceased, fortunately has survived for the past 27 years and certainly cannot be said to be in an indigent condition which would elicit reconsideration of the case of the applicant, under the Compassionate Appointment Scheme. After nearly three decades (27 years) the applicant cannot try and get a backdoor entry by way of seeking a job especially when there would be a long list of other candidates awaiting consideration and who are probably facing similar or worse financial destitution and indigent condition, as the applicant in OA.

The citations relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant are distinguishable on facts from the present OA and hence do not come to his rescue. The OA is dismissed being devoid of merits. No costs.