SREEJA Vs. CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is filed against the order in O.A. No. 1020 of 1999 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench. Application was preferred for compassionate appointment, by the daughter of one K. Valsala, who died on 4.11.1979. She was working as a Postal Assistant in the Palakkad Head Post Office. At that time, the petitioner was 10 months old. Petitioner's father, Sri. P. R. Soman, was an employee of the Postal Department. Valsala had a daughter Anuradha in her first marriage. There was dispute between the parties, with regard to sharing of terminal benefits due to Valsala, which led to filing of O. S. No. 381 of 1987 before the Munsiff's Court, Palakkad. It was noticed that the said suit was subsequently disposed of on the basis of compromise petition, wherein parties have agreed compassionate appointment be given to Anuradha. Petitioner, however, denies the said claim stating that Anuradha had forsaken her right in favour of the petitioner. We need not go into those controversies in this petition. The only question to be considered in this case is whether petitioner is entitled to get appointment on compassionate grounds. We notice that at the time of death of Valsala, petitioner was only 10 months old. She preferred a petition on 5.7.1997 which was rejected by the authorities by order dated 24.11.1997. She also filed yet another representation dated 3.12.1997 followed by another representation dated 20.1.1999. Those representations were rejected again by the department vide Ext. P6 order dated 21.5.1999.

(2.) We may examine the claim of the petitioner in those representations. In her first representation she has stated as follows:

(3.) We are of the view that the very purpose of effecting appointment on compassionate ground itself would be defeated if claim raised by persons like the petitioner is accepted. As held by the Apex Court, the purpose is to tide over the immediate difficulties. We are therefore of the view that petitioner has not made out any ground for appointment on compassionate grounds. Therefore Tribunal was justified in rejecting the application.