SAJAD AHMAD SHAH Vs. STATE OF JAMMU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have craved the indulgence of this Court in granting them the following relief(s):

(2.) Father of petitioner No. 1 and son of petitioner No. 2, namely Habibullah Shah (hereinafter referred to as "deceased") is stated to have worked in Power Development Department on substantive basis as Lineman from 01.03.1973 and while continuing as such, till November, 1989, disappeared. The missing report is stated to have been lodged with the Police concerned- Police Station, Pattan. However, the body of the deceased employee was recovered on 24.01.2012 from the General Bus Stand, Jammu, and on identification petitioners received the dead body and performed the last rites. An inquest proceedings under Section 174 of Cr. PC were undertaken by SHO, Police Station, Jammu, resulting in filing of final report concluding that the deceased was mentally unsound and died a natural death on 24.01.2012, at Jammu Bus Stand.

(3.) Petitioners being the legal heirs of the deceased, approached the respondents for release of the benefits, viz salary/settlement of pension/payment of gratuity/ considering the petitioner No. 1 for compassionate appointment. The benefits were claimed on the strength of the deceased was an employee of PDD, died while in service and had to retire in 2013, on reaching the age of superannuation. The petitioner No. 1 being eligible claimed appointment on compassionate grounds with the application of SRO 43 of 1994, as also the petitioner No. 2, claimed the pensionary benefits/release of salary, gratuity etc., in terms of the applicable rules, however, the respondents having withhold the benefits, formed a ground for petitioner No. 1 to approach this Court in the first instance by filing SWP No. 2328/2013 and this Court in terms of final order dated 28.11.2013, disposed of the said writ petition with direction to respondents 2 and 4 to take decision on the claim of the petitioner for his appointment on compassionate grounds. Respondents having considered the matter, resulting in notifying the consideration order in terms of communication No. CE/M&RE/Adm-II/13230/As dated 27.06.2016, which is challenged in the present writ petition on the varied grounds with particular reference that the decision taken is contrary to the rules and the law.