Sudheesh Kumar vs Union Of India & Ors

Om Prakash VII, Member (J)

Shri Santosh Mani Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Chakrapani Vatsyayan, learned counsel for the respondents, are present and heard on the issue of admission.

Earlier one OA had been filed as OA No 144 of 2014 which was decided on 07.12.2018 with the direction to consider the name of the applicant for appointment on compassionate grounds on its own merit against the vacancy of subsequent recruitment year in accordance with departmental rule. It further appears that thereafter another OA vide OA No 200/2019 was filed and the same was decided on 20.01.2025 and respondents were directed to consider the case of the applicant for compassionate appointment in terms of their own letter dated 13.03.2023 in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. It also appears that in compliance of the order passed in the aforesaid OA, the respondents have issued a letter dated 21.04.2025 intimating the applicant that "Your Affidavits already received in this office and found in order but Affidavits are still to be received from other applicants for consideration of their cases. After receiving Affidavits from all the willing applicants the same will be submitted before the competent authority for his consideration / for further instructions."And contempt petition filed against the order passed in OA No 200 of 2019 as CP No 193 of 2025 was closed on 13.11.2025. Now, the present OA has been filed seeking following relief:

"i.Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 to consider and decide the compassionate appointment of the applicant on the basis of carry forward rules as mentioned in the letter dated 21.04.2025 send by the office of the opposite party no.2 and give compassionate appointment to the applicant within a period fix by this Hon'ble Tribunal.

ii. Issue any other order or direction which the Hon'ble Tribunal beings fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also kindly be issued in interest of justice.

iii. Cost of the applicant may also be awarded."

Since the respondents themselves have stated that on receiving all the documents from other candidates, cases will be referred to the competent authority for consideration, meaning thereby the respondents are in agreement to reconsider the case of the applicant in future vacancy. In that scenario, there is no need to issue fresh direction to the respondents to consider and decide the compassionate appointment of the applicant on the basis of carry forward rules. It is clarified that if the respondents themselves are in agreement to consider the case of the applicant afresh, then I am also of the view that relief claimed in the OA at this stage cannot be entertained and the OA is not liable to be admitted. It is further clarified that if any order against the applicant is passed by the respondents and a cause of action is made out to file fresh OA, the applicant will be at liberty to file a fresh OA.

Thus, in view of the aforesaid discussions and analysis, the instant original application is not liable to be admitted and therefore the OA is dismissed at the admission stage itself. All associated MAs stand disposed of. No costs.