Shankar Uraon vs State Of Jharkhand

Pramath Patnaik, J

In the captioned writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for direction upon the respondents to pay the petitioner the scale of clerk on

which post he joined and has been working since 01.08.2010 in compliance of order of Regional Deputy Director, Health Services, South

Chhotanagpur, Ranchi vide memo dated 25.05.2010.

2. The facts, as delineated in the writ application, in brief is that father of the petitioner was an Orderly in Leprosy Research and Training Institute,

Brambey, who died in harness in the year 1993. After the death of his father, the petitioner, who was having Intermediate qualification applied for

compassionate appointment and his name was recommended for appointment on the post of Clerk and thereafter, the District Establishment, Deputy

Collector, Ranchi vide memo dated 26.08.1996 intimated the Civil Surgeoncum-Chief Medical Officer, Ranchi to issue appointment letter to the

petitioner within a week as per the recommendation of District Compassionate Appointment Committee. However, the petitioner was appointed on the

post of Ward Boy â€" a class IV post in Leprosy Research and Training Institute, Brambey as there was no vacant post of Grade III. It has further

been averred that by passage of time after retirement of one Sir Mokhtar Imam, Clerk in the office, as per the condition laid down in the

recommendation letter 26.08.1996, the petitioner was appointed on the post of clerk vide memo dated 25.05.2010. It has further been averred that

though the petitioner joined on the post of clerk on 28.07.2010 but he is still getting the scale of ward boy, on which, he was previously working.

Aggrieved thereof, the petitioner represented to In-charge Medical Officer, Leprosy Research and Training Institute, Brambey but it turned deaf ear.

Heard Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. L.C.N. Sahdeo, learned G.P. IV being assisted by Mr. Sandip Verma, A.C

to learned G.P. IV as also by Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, A.C to learned G.P IV for the respondents-State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted with vehemence that the District Establishment Deputy Collector, Ranchi vide memo dated 26.08.1996

unequivocally directed the Civil Surgeoncum-Chief Medical Officer, Ranchi to appoint the petitioner on Class III post and in case of unavailability of

Class III post, adjust the petitioner on the said post in future. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as a matter of fact in the year 1996

since there was no vacancy against Class III post, petitioner without any demur joined on the post of Class IV. But when the vacancy arose after

retirement of one Sri Mokhtar Imam, Clerk in the said office, the petitioner was rightly appointed on the post of clerk vide memo dated 25.05.2010,

but, even after that he was not granted the payscale of Clerk, which is against the principle of natural justice and also violative of Articles 14, 21 and

300 A of the Constitution of India.Â

As against this, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that it is a fact that Compassionate Committee recommended the petitioner for

appointment on the post of Clerk, but since there was no vacant post, on the request of petitioner, he was appointed on compassionate ground on class

IV post. It has further been submitted that it is settled law that once the petitioner appointed on compassionate ground the employ cannot be

reappointed on any other post. Only, he may be promoted to the higher post, according to the rules and regulations. In the case at hand, the petitioner

was appointed by R.D.D, south Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi who has no authority to appoint any person on Class III post, as the post of Clerk in

Leprosy Research & Training Centre, Brambey is under control of Director-in-Chief, Health Services and not under the control and authority of

Regional Deputy Director, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi as evident from letter dated 20.01.1992 of Health Department, Government of Bihar.

Referring to the decision rendered in the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal Vs. State of Haryana and others as reported in 1994 AIR SCW 2305, learned

counsel for the respondents-State submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court has time and again held that the whole object of granting compassionate

employment is to enable the family of deceased government servant to tide over the sudden crises and the object is not to give a member of such

family a post much less a post for post held by the deceased. Mere death of an employee in harness does not entitle his family to such source of

livelihood.Â

On perusal of record, it appears that after death of father of petitioner in the year 1993, the District Establishment Deputy Commissioner vide letter

dated 26.08.1996 recommended the name of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground on Class III post or on Class IV post, against

the vacant post. Admittedly, at the relevant point of time no post of Class III was vacant, hence the petitioner was offered the Class IV post, which he

accepted and joined on the said post and continued to serve as Ward Boy on the said post.

By passage of time, one Sri Mokhtar Imam, Clerk retired from the said office, against that vacant post the petitioner was appointed by the Regional

Deputy Director, Health Services vide memo dated 25.05.2010 on the basis of averments made in the memo dated 26.08.1996 of District

Establishment Committee to the effect that “ …. fu;qfDr vkj{k.k vuqikr es a fjfDr ds fo:) gh dh tk, ;k Ckkn es a lek;ksftr dh tk,xhAâ€. From plain

reading of memo dated 26.08.1996 in its entirety, it is amply clear that it has been stated in different context as it only says that appointment shall be

done according to reservation basis or shall be adjusted later. Even otherwise also, as per circular/letter dated 20.01.1992 of Health Department,

Government of Bihar appointment on the post of Clerk in Leprosy Research & Training Centre, Brambey is under control of Directorin-Chief, Health

Services and not under the control and authority of Regional Deputy Director, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi and he has no authority to appoint

any person on Class III post.

Hence, there appears no illegality in not granting the scale of class III to the petitioner as the petitioner was offered the post of Class III de hors the

Rules and furthermore, no benefit could be derived from the averments made in memo dated 26.08.1996 issued by the District Establishment Deputy

Commissioner. Hence, petitioner is not entitled to get any relief, as sought for from this Court.

For the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition being devoid of any merit is dismissed.Â