RUPALI CHOWDHURY Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Nobody appears on behalf of the respondents despite service of notice.

(2.) This application is directed against a judgment and order dated February 29, 2000 passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal in O.A. 1557 of 1998, whereby and whereunder the application filed by the petitioner herein for appointment on compassionate ground had been dismissed holding, "Neither the Governments nor the public authorities, are at liberty to follow any other procedure or relax the qualifications laid down by the Rules for the post. However, to this general rule which is to be followed strictly in every case, there are some exceptions carved out in the interest of justice and to meet certain contingencies. One such exception is in favour of the dependants of an employee dying in harness and leaving his family in penury and without any means of livelihood. In such cases out of pure humanitarian consideration taking into consideration the fact that unless some source of livelihood is provided, the family would not be able to make both ends meet, a provision is made in the rules to provide gainful employment. The whole object of granting compassionate employment is thus 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 worth noting is that mere death of an employee in harness does not entitle his family to such source of livelihood. The Government or the public authority concerned has to examine the financial condition of the family of the deceased and only if it is satisfied that but for the provision of employment, the family will not be able to meet the crisis, that a Job is to be offered to the eligible member of the family. The petitioner has not disclosed the fact that after fixation of family pension at the rate of Rs. 668/- p.m., there has been revision of pension/family pension. As per chart submitted by the respondents, family pension is now at Rs. 2042/- p.m. when added with relief as admissible, the family pension will be about Rs. 2,700/- p.m. which cannot be said to be small amount as per standard in our country. Even if, the lump sum amount received by the petitioner is off set due to medical expenditure, the petitioner can maintain herself with the family pension for it is a single member family."

(3.) It appears that the Learned Tribunal has not considered the policy decision adopted by the State for grant of appointment on compassionate ground in its proper perspective. It is true that recruitment should be made in terms of the recruitment rules; but one of the exceptions to Clause (2) of Article 16 of the Constitution of India is grant of appointment on compassionate ground. It is also true that the policy underlying the same is to mitigate the immediate hardship of the members of the deceased family, but the law nowhere contemplates that only because a family pension would be payable the same by itself mitigates the claim of the petitioner to obtain appointment on compassionate ground. On what basis the Learned Tribunal has arrived at a finding that a family pension of Rs. 2,700/-per month will serve the financial requirement of the family is not clear.