JASWANT SINGH Vs. ADDL. DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved of the order dated 28.05.2018 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in short, 'CAT', whereby, an application being OA no. 1942/2018 made by the petitioner seeking compassionate appointment, was dismissed, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.

(2.) Concisely, the relevant facts are that the father of the petitioner was employed with the respondents and died during service on 27.08.2006. According to the petitioner, he made an application seeking compassionate appointment as a driver on 27.08.2007 and in the absence of its non consideration, he preferred an OA before CAT and during the proceedings so initiated by him, it came to be informed to him that his request for compassionate appointment stood rejected on 30.08.2012 on the ground that he was ineligible as he had not qualified the 12th standard. Thereafter, he filed another OA No.3884/2013 extending challenge to the said rejection on the premise that the respondents had given appointments to few others similarly placed like him and they were appointed as LDCs. During the course of the pendency of the said OA No.3884/2013, the petitioner passed 12th standard and taking into account such further development, CAT vide order dated 27.02.2015 directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner during the current year within 3 months. It resulted into filing of contempt petition No.472/2015 as the order of the CAT dated 27.02.2015 was allegedly not complied with. In the counter affidavit filed, the respondents stated that no regular post was available with them. It appears that on further directions issued by CAT during the pendency of the contempt proceedings, the respondents passed a speaking order dated 02.03.2016 - not forming part of the instant writ petition and then, a revised speaking order dated 21.06.2016, reiterating its stand that no regular post was available to be offered on compassionate appointment to the petitioner. In this background, the contempt proceedings came to be closed by CAT on 10.08.2016 reserving the liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 21.06.2016, if he was still aggrieved, in accordance with law. It however emerges from the record that thereafter the respondents passed another order dated 03.05.2017 for his case having been considered by the Committee on Compassionate Appointment (CCA) in pursuance to the order dated 27.02.2015 and having been rejected for the reasons stated thereunder. On this, petitioner filed WP(C) No. 3261/2018 which was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to challenge the revised speaking order dated 21.06.2016. It resulted into filing of OA No. 1942/2018 which has come to be dismissed vide the impugned order.

(3.) For the compassionate appointment on the demise of the father of the petitioner in the year 2006, the petitioner as of now in the year 2018, is seeking to agitate the correctness of the grounds in rejecting his case of compassionate appointment vide order dated 03.05.2017. The relevant portion of the said speaking order reads as under: