AMAR DHANUK Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 1102 of 2011. By the order of 13th March, 2013 the Tribunal has dismissed the Original Application filed by the Petitioner to claim compassionate appointment. The Petitioner's father expired on 29th July, 2000, while in service with the Respondents. The Petitioner was a minor at that point of time. He claims that his mother submitted an application in the year 2002 for appointing the Petitioner on compassionate grounds as a Sweeper. However, the State has denied receipt of this application. Thereafter, the Petitioner attained the age of majority in the year 2005. He waited for three years after which he submitted an application on 7th January, 2008 for being appointed as a Sweeper. It appears that he was called upon in the year 2009 by the Respondents to submit certain documents, which he did. On 11th August, 2011 the Director of Health Services, Government of West Bengal, took a decision that there was no need to provide relief to the Petitioner as his father had expired in the year 2000 and his mother, though eligible for appointment, did not apply for the same.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has argued that the Tribunal has erred in dismissing the application on the ground that the Petitioner had sought relief belatedly.

(3.) We have perused the decision of the Tribunal and we do not find that it is erroneous. The Petitioner's mother, though eligible in the year 2000 to apply for compassionate appointment, did not do so and instead, in the year 2002 sought the employment of the Petitioner though he was a minor at that point of time. When the Petitioner attained the age of majority in 2005, he did not apply immediately for employment. Instead, he applied only on 7th January, 2008 for compassionate appointment, three years after he attained the age of majority. Thereafter, correspondence ensued and the decision was taken by the Authorities in 2011 not to grant such relief to the Petitioner. The Tribunal passed its order on 13th March, 2013. The Petitioner has filed the present petition on 6th May, 2014. Thus, at every stage the Petitioner has delayed in approaching the Authorities or the Tribunal or this Court. No reasons have been given in the petition for approaching this Court after a delay of one year. Apart from this, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal.