SUPRINTENDENT R M S Vs. KAVITHA K FRANCIS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Postal establishment challenges the Central Administrative Tribunal's direction to consider the case of the respondent herein for compassionate appointment. The applicant, Kavitha, a female aged about 32 years at the time of the application before the Tribunal, lost her father on 03.08.2009, while working as a Mailman, which is a Group-D post. The certificate issued by the Tahsildar of Kanayannur Taluk shows that late Francis, a Roman Catholic Christian, had married Usha belonging to Hindu Ezhava community. Their daughter Kavitha is thus the daughter of an inter-caste married couple.

(2.) Going by the pleadings contained in the Original Application and in the reply statement filed by the establishment before the Tribunal, it can no more be treated as a matter in dispute that the applicant Kavitha, the married daughter of the deceased employee, has two children and she and her mother virtually strive hard to sustain themselves. The basic facts reflected in the pleadings and the documentary evidence including the representation of the applicant and her mother, which is produced by the establishment along with the reply statement, are to the effect that the applicant Kavitha's husband turned out to be a drunkard and he does not care for the family. He had invited sufficient financial problems, which led ultimately to the homestead of Kavitha's parents being sold and she and her mother are now residing in a rented premises trying to meet the ends, taking care also of the two children.

(3.) The pleadings in the reply statement of the establishment before the Tribunal pointedly show that their stand before the Tribunal was that Kavitha, having been married, it is the liability of her husband to take care of and provide for her and the children and such responsibility is on him. The fact that the family had lost their assets on account of the waggeries of the son-in-law of the home cannot be treated as a situation where the daughter of the deceased government servant could claim employment on compassionate grounds; contended the establishment. We see that it was specific pleading of the establishment before the Tribunal that a daughter, on being married, ceased to be a member of the family of the government servant concerned, for being extended compassionate appointment.