Yogendra Prasad & Anr vs The State of Jharkhand

The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for direction to respondents to take a decision for appointment on compassionate ground in view of the fact that the petitioner has already appeared in interview before the respondentauthorities for appointment on compassionate ground.

Factual Matrix of the Case The petitioner no.1 is the wife and the petitioner no.2 is the son of the deceased namely Narmdeshwar Mishra, who was an employee of the Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation, Patna and he was working on the post of Assistant Godown Manager in Chandankiyari, Dhanbad and died in harness on 2.11.2007. After death of the husband of petitioner no.1, she filed an application in the requisite format before the respondentauthorities for appointment on compassionate ground with a request to appoint her sonpetitioner no.2 on compassionate ground on the post of Assistant. Along with the said application form, educational qualification certificates as well as caste certificate of the petitioner no.2 was also submitted. The petitioner had also taken ''No Objection Certificate'' to the effect that petitioner no.2 should be appointed in her place on compassionate ground. Respondentauthorities have rejected the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground vide order dated 21.01.2008 i.e Annexure3, on the sole ground that there was no scheme for appointment on compassionate ground in Bihar State Food Corporation and, hence, this writ petitioner has been filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Sumit Gadodia argues that after the order of rejection dated 21.01.2008 the respondentBSFC has floated a new scheme for appointment on compassionate ground. In view of the new scheme floated by the respondentauthorities which has been annexed as Annexure11 to the supplementary affidavit, the petitioner again applied for appointment on compassionate ground. On the application made by the petitioner and after going through the documents, the petitioner was called for interview through telephonic message. The petitioner appeared for interview on 25th January, 2017 but, till date no order has been passed for appointment on compassionate ground. Learned counsel draws the attention of the Court towards supplementary affidavit which has been taken on record today in which at paragraph 7 it has been specifically mentioned that BSFC has been pleased to recommend 28 applicants seeking compassionate appointment, but the case of the petitioner has neither been recommended nor considered only on account of pending adjudication of writ petition. Mr. Jitendra S. Singh appearing on behalf of Bihar State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation fairly contends that after the bifurcation, Bihar has no jurisdiction to entertain the case of the petitioner as petitioner''s father was employed in the District of Dhanbad.

Be that as it may, going through the rival submissions of the parties, this Court directs the respondentBSFC to take a decision on the representation made by the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground. It is made clear that while taking a decision the respondentauthorities will take into account that they have appointed 28 persons on compassionate ground. If the case of the petitioner is found similar to them then the petitioner also deserves to be appointed on compassionate ground. It is further directed that the respondentauthorities may take a decision in accordance with 3law. The decision regarding compassionate appointment be taken preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.