UNION OF INDIA Vs. DIBIN RAJ.S.V

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This original petition has been filed by the Union of India and its officers challenging Ext.P3 order passed by the Tribunal in OA No.879/2016 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench. The 1st applicant is the son of late Vijayarajan who was employed in the Postal Department. The 2 nd applicant is the wife of late Vijayarajan. The respondents herein approached the Tribunal inter alia seeking for a direction to the petitioners herein to reconsider the claim of the 1 st applicant for compassionate appointment. The Tribunal after considering the application, issued the following directions.

(2.) The only contention raised by the petitioners herein is that the direction issued by the Tribunal to ignore the terminal benefits is not in accordance with the scheme for compassionate appointment. This issue had been considered by the Apex Court in State of Himachal Pradesh and others v. Shashi Kumar [(2019) 3 SCC 653, wherein the Apex Court held as under;

(3.) We heard learned counsel appearing for the respondents as well. Apparently, in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court, the Tribunal had committed error in directing exclusion of the terminal benefits for the purpose of considering the points for providing benefits under the compassionate appointment scheme.