P.A. VIJAYAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who got appointment as Excise Guard as per Ext. P6 Government order pursuant to a scheme for employment assistance to the dependents of those who died in harness seeks a declaration that he is eligible for appointment as per para 19 of the scheme issued as per G.O. dated 17.12.1987, to the post of Excise Inspector.

(2.) The Government has evolved a scheme in the said G.O. (P)34/87/P & ARD dated 17-12-1987 for such employment assistance. The Supreme Court in Umesh Kumar Nagpal Vs. State of Haryana, 1994(3) SCT 174 : (1994) 4 SCC 138 (SC) has held that 'the whole object of granting compassionate employment is to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis. The object is not to give a member of such family a post much less a post for post held by the deceased. What is further, mere death of an employee in harness does not entitle his family to such source of livelihood'. But at the same time some compassion has to be shown to such family. It is in that background that the scheme evolved by the Government for this purpose has to be viewed.

(3.) The petitioner, a graduate with good physique claimed employment assistance to the post of Excise Inspector, Assistant Excise Inspector, Preventive Officer or any other posts eligible, in successive preference as per Ext. P1 application. That application was duly processed and the Board of Revenue recommended his appointment, by Ext. P2, to the post of Excise Guard in Ernakulam and that was approved by Government as per Ext. P6. It is true that, in Exts. P3 and P4 and reminded by Ext. P5, the petitioner had appraised Government his desire to get posting at least as Preventive Officer. It is in spite of that the Government showed compassion to the petitioner and offered employment as Excise Guard. The petitioner accepted this and dissatisfied with the attitude of the Government in not giving atleast a posting as Preventive Officer, he approached this Court by filing this Original Petition.