BRIJESH KUMAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner herein seeking compassionate appointment upon the demise of his father, who was serving as a Constable with the General Reserve Police at Itarsi. The father of the Petitioner died in harness on 17.4.2017. The Petitioner made a representation to the Respondent for compassionate appointment for himself and his mother. A copy of the said representation is annexed to the petition as Annexure P/1 at page 11. In the said representation, the Petitioner has stated that he is residing with his mother, looking after her and is responsible for her maintenance and therefore, he has prayed that he be appointed on the post of his late father on compassionate grounds.

(2.) The Respondent rejected the application moved by the Petitioner for compassionate appointment on the ground that the Petitioner's elder brother is employed as a Police constable with the Utter Pradesh Police. The Petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that there was no independent enquiry to ascertain if the Petitioner and his mother were not eligible to be considered for compassionate appointment and that the application was dismissed by the Respondent perfunctorily on the sole ground that the Petitioner's elder brother was employed as a constable with the U.P. Police.

(3.) The Respondent has dismissed the application vide order dated 8.2.2018 which is Annexure P/5 at page 22 of the petition. While doing so, the Respondent has held that on the basis of the documents given by the Petitioner himself, it is apparent that his elder brother is employed as a Constable with the U.P. Police and, therefore, in view of Clause 4.1 of the circular dated 18.8.2018 issued by the General Administration Department, any member of the deceased Government servant if employed in a Government job or in the employment of any undertaking of the State, would disentitle any other member of the family of the deceased employee for compassionate appointment.