Suraj Kumar vs Union Of India & Others

Pratima K Gupta, Member (J)

I have joined the Single Bench online through video conferring.

Shri Sheetala Sahai, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Chakrapani Vatsyayan, learned counsel for the respondents are present.

By way of present original application, the applicant is seeking following reliefs:-

“(i) Issue a direction to consider the applicant for appointment under dying-in-harness.

(ii) Further be pleased to direct the respondent authority to consider the applicant representation for an appointment under dying-in-harness by reasoned and speaking order.

(iii) Any other relief which this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case”.

The brief facts leading to the original application are that the father of the applicant died on 01.08.2011 and since then he has been espousing his claim for seeking compassionate appointment. His last representation is dated 25.02.2013. It is being nine years since then he has been complacent not approached this Tribunal.

Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposes the original application and raises a preliminary objection of delay. He submits that the said original application is not accompanied by any condonation of delay application. He further submits that the scheme of compassionate appointment is to mitigate the indigent circumstances of the family who losses the primary earning member of their family. However, since the family of the applicant has survived for 11 years now, no case is made out for consideration of the applicant for compassionate appointment.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that he wishes to withdraw the original application and file a fresh self-contained application along with the condonation of delay application.

Accordingly, the original application is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs.