BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD Vs. TITTIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondents in O.A.No.675/2010 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench assails the order dated 27.5.2011, under Art.227 of the Constitution of India. THE respondent herein is the applicant before the Tribunal. THE father of the respondent, V.Pushkaran, who died on 13.10.2005, was a Telephone Mechanic under the petitioners. Seeking employment under the Compassionate Employment Scheme the respondent, who is one among the three legal heirs, preferred an application before the petitioners along with requisite performa and consent from other legal heirs. THE petitioners declined the request by Annexure-A1 order assailing which the respondent moved the Tribunal below. THE Tribunal by the impugned order dated 27.5.2011 allowed the petition and directed the petitioners to reconsider the application filed by the respondent. Feeling aggrieved, this petition was filed.

(2.) WE have heard Smt. I.Sheela Devi, the learned standing counsel for the petitioners, perused the impugned order and the documents. The argument of the petitioners is that following the death of the father of the respondent a family pension of Rs.3,830/- was granted to the mother of the respondent. Towards the retiral benefits, a sum of Rs. 5,41,823/- was also sanctioned. As per the norms set up by the petitioners, the respondent is not entitled to get employment on compassionate grounds.