DRAUPADI BEHERA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 8.9.1998 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack rejecting Original Application No. 5 of 1998 filed by the petitioners.

(2.) THE facts briefly are that the petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No, 2 are the wife and son of late Iswar Chandra Beherd, Late Iswar Chandra Behera was working as E.D.D.A. cum E.D.M.C, in Sabira Branch from 19.1.1971 and died while in service on 25.2.1995 leaving behind his wife, the petitioner No. 1 and five sons including petitioner No. 2. The petitioner No. 1 addressed an application dated 9.6.1997 to the Government of India, Ministry of Communications, Department of Post for compassionate appointment of her son, the petitioner No. 2. By a communication dated 5.9.1997 the said application was rejected by the Government of India, Ministry of Communications. Department of Post. Paragraph 2 of the said communication dated 5.9.1997, a coy of which has been annexed to the writ petition as Arinexure 5 contains the reasons for rejection of the application for compassionate appointment and is quoted herein below :

(3.) MRS Agrawal, learned Sr. Standing Counsel (Central) on the other hand, sought to sustain the impugned judgment of the Tribunal. She submitted that the Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion on the basis of the affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioners themselves that all the brothers had separated during the life time of late Iswar Chandra Behera and in view of such separation of all the brothers' the petitioner No. 2 was not entitled to be appointed on compassionate ground on the death of late Iswar Chandra Behera. She also relied on the scheme for compassionate appointment and submitted that the purpose of making compassionate appointment is to support the dependent family members of the deceased Government servant and since in this case, the petitioners had their own income, there was no necessity for giving appointment under the scheme to the petitioner No. 2. She relied on the reasons given by the Government of India, Ministry of Communications, Department Of Post in the communication dated 5.9. 1997.