SHASHI PAL Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant herein is aggrieved by the action of the respondents whereby he has not been appointed on daily wage basis on compassionate ground after the death of his father as per the policy of the respondent State. Brief and relevant facts of the case are that the father of the applicant was working as daily wage worker (Mate) with the respondents department and died in harness on 17.3.2004. The claim of the applicant is that his father late Sufal Ram joined the respondents department as daily waged worker in the year 1977 -78 as per his knowledge and seniority was maintained till the time of his death when he was about 50 years old. After the death of the applicant, respondent No. 3 allowed the applicant to work for some time, but he was not permitted to work continuously as notional and fictional brakes were given to him. The applicant has time and again requested the respondents to appoint him on compassionate ground as no other family members are interested to be appointed on compassionate ground.

(2.) REPLY was filed by the respondents/State disputing the claim of the applicant. The main ground for opposing the claim of the applicant is that he is not eligible to be appointed on daily wage basis as his late father died (?) (did) not complete he requisite condition of 240 days in each calendar years continuously for eight years. In support of this contention, they have annexed maydays chart in respect of Sufal Ram as per which he has not worked for 240 days in each calendar year continuously for eight years. The position reflected in the reply relates to the years 1994 -95 to 2004 -05. It has been admitted in the reply that the father of the applicant was working as a daily wager in Gharanoo Beat of Bhattiyat Rangelate Sufal Ram was not a regular daily waged as he did not complete 240 days in each calendar years continuously for eight years as per mandays chart annexed with the reply. It is submitted in the reply that the applicant was engaged as daily waged in the Forest Department w.e.f. 1.2.1994 and not from 1977. The claim of the applicant has primarily been opposed on the ground as far as the appointment on compassionate ground concerning such employment cannot provided if deceased daily wager has not completed 240 days in each calendar year continuously for a period of eight years. The applicant was engaged on daily wage basis from time to time as and when work and funds were available but was not considered to be appointed on permanent basis and as such is not covered under the policy for compassionate appointment.

(3.) THE short controversy in this case relates to claim of the applicant for appointment on daily wage basis under the policy of compassionate appointment as his father was a daily wager under the respondent department. The learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that as per para -17.31 of the Hand Book on Personnel Matters Vol. 1 page 658 there was a stipulation of 240 days in each calendar year for at least five years in case of deceased employee for giving employments assistance to a member of the family of daily waged employee who dies while in service. He pointed out further that this condition has since been amended as per Annexure 17.27 applicable from 18.5.1995. The perusal of Annexure 17.27 clearly reveals that this condition has already been amended and stipulation of 240 days in a calendar year is no longer applicable to consider the case for giving employment assistance to a member of the family of daily wager who dies while in service. It is not in dispute that the applicant had worked under the respondents as daily wager and as per mandays chart in the year 1994 -95 to 2004 -05, the period he worked under the respondents department. The main objection raised by the respondents was that the applicant was not eligible to be considered for appointment of daily wage basis on his later father had not completed 240 days in each calendar year continuously for eight years as per provisions contained in para 17.3.1. This condition has since been dispensed with applicable from with immediate effect as per Annexure 17.27. Accordingly, he is eligible to be considered for giving employment assistance as daily wager as per the policy of the State Government for compassionate appointment. In view of this position, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the applicant as per the latest provision contained in Annexure 17.27 afresh as per the said provision. The respondents are further directed to consider and decide his case within a period of three months from the passing of this order. In view of the above this original application is disposed of in terms of above with no order as to costs.