A.JOHN Vs. DELHI UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COUNSEL for the petitioner seeks adjournment to file rejoinder -affidavit in this writ petition which seeks compassionate appointment. Counter - affidavit was filed way back on 8th October, 2013, and therefore, there is no ground for grant of time to file rejoinder -affidavit in a case such as the present and more so in view of the facts which have come out from the counter -affidavit. Counsel for the petitioner states that his mother was not well in the month of November,2013 however when queried whether he appeared in Courts he says ,,Yes. Even assuming I take the statement that counsels mother was not well in November 2013, and therefore he could not prepare the case, today is 10th December and surely more than enough number of days were available for counsel for the petitioner to prepare his case. I am of the opinion therefore adjournment prayed for is not justified and in fact the adjournment which is sought is only a strategic adjournment which is frowned upon by Courts.

(2.) THE facts as stated in the writ petition shows that father of the petitioner when he expired on 4.1.2010, he only had about 10 months of service left with the respondent no.1 -University i.e he had served out almost the entire term of his employment. Preliminary submissions no.1 to 5 and 7 to 10 of the counter -affidavit show that the mother of the petitioner with whom the petitioner is living got terminal benefits of a substantial amount of Rs.7,68,383/ - on the death of the father of the petitioner. Not only that, petitioners mother in the year 2010 was getting a pension of about Rs.8,000/ - per month and as of date is getting an amount of Rs.10,000/ - per month. In fact, the pension is going to be revised upwards on account of re - fixation of pay, by grant of benefits under the 6 th Pay Commission Report. The counter -affidavit also shows that petitioner is only 5th class pass and being already of 37 years cannot get the appointment because eligibility criteria is not met for appointment of the petitioner whether as a Group ,,C or Group ,,D or lowest post employee in the respondent no.1 -University. Also, the intention of grant of compassionate appointment is to prevent penury and in the present case I do not find that there is any penury in the family of the petitioner as it has already received huge terminal benefits, besides the aspect that the mother of the petitioner is getting monthly pension of Rs. 10,000/ - per month, with the same to be revised higher in terms of the 6th Pay Commission Report.

(3.) THEREFORE , two basic requirements of seeking compassionate appointment are missing in this case and which are of non -fulfillment of the eligibility criteria as the petitioner is only 5th class pass and the fact that it cannot be said that there is such penury in the family of the petitioner that the petitioner should get compassionate appointment.