SUDESH KALRA Vs. BUREAU OF INDIAL STANDARDS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The husband of the petitioner was working as Senior Personal Assistant with the respondent Bureau of Indian Standards (in short B.I.S.). He died on 21st May, 1993. He left the petitioner as the only legal heir. The petitioner after the death of her husband applied for employment on compassionate grounds on 11th June, 1993. When employment on compassionate ground was not given to her she sent reminders in September 1993, August, 1995 and March, 1996. On her repeated reminders the respondents vide their letter dated 24th April, 1996 intimated that her case was not found fit for appointment on compassionate grounds. Her request for appointment ointment on compassionate ground was declined. After receipt of this letter petitioner made another representation to the respondent to reconsider its decision. The same was also rejected on 30th May, 1996. She made yet another representation which has not been decided, hence this petition.

(2.) Respondent's stand on the other hand has been that even though the husband of the petitioner died in harness yet she is not entitle for a job on compassionate ground because her financial conditions are not such for which a job on compassionate ground could be offered. Deceased was issueless. She being alone has sufficient means to live comfortably. She was paid a sum of Rs. 4,19,932.50 paise on account of various welfare schemes. She also been paid a sum of Rs. 2,165.00 per month as family pension. Moreover, during the visit of a Welfare Officer of the respondent this petitioner informed him that the purpose of her applying for the job was not money but to pass the spare time and to avoid loneliness. She has been paying a sum of Rs. 30.00 as rent of the accommodation in her possession. On this count also it can be said that she is not in financial difficulties. There being no financial liability she is not eligible for appointment on compassionate ground. In the rejoinder the petitioner took the plea that she was offered Class-D post i.e. the post of Peon which she declined. She was assured that as and when she passes the 12th Class she would be given the job of a Clerk. Since now she has passed the 12th Class, hence entitled to get a job on compassionate ground. Moreover, on account of the illness of her husband she had to take a loan of Rs. 71,000.00 out of the amount received against the welfare schemes she had to shell out Rs. 71,000.00 towards repayment of loan and remaining amount has been spent for purchasing a residential plot of land measuring about 68 sq. yards. She has to have a house of her own. Amount received having already been spent there is nothing left with her to maintain herself. She has also to adopt a child and hence requires job.

(3.) After hearing Mr. R.K. Saini for the petitioner and Mr. B.K. Sood for the respondent I am of the opinion that petitioner is not entitle for a job on compassionate ground. In similar circumstances the Apex Court in the case of Omesh Kumar Nagpal Vs. State of Haryana, JT 1994 (3) SC page 525 laid down the criteria for the appointment in public service oh compassionate ground. The criteria to be considered is enumerated thus:- The Government or the public authority concerned has to examine the financial condition of the family of the deceased, and it is only if it is satisfied, that but for the provision of employment, the family will not be able to meet the crisis that a job is to be offered to the eligible member of the family. The whole object of granting compassionate employment is thus to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis and to relieve the family of the financial destitution and to help it get over the emergency. (Underlinings are mine)