HEMENDRA PURI Vs. JAI NARAYAN VYAS UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present intra court appeal has been preferred against the judgment dtd. 12/4/2018 passed by learned Single Bench whereby writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking compassionate appointment in the respondent Jai Narayan Vyas University (hereinafter referred to as 'respondent-university') in lieu of his deceased father was rejected.

(2.) Briefly stated facts of the case are that the father of the appellant while working on the post of 'Tabla Vadak' in the respondent-university, passed away on 1/12/2004. The appellant and respondent No.4 (born through second wife Smt. Kamla) applied for appointment on compassionate grounds in place of deceased employee. The respondent-university considered both the applications keeping in view the provisions of the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules of 1996') and vide office order dtd. 4/8/2005 extended compassionate appointment in favour of respondent No.4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the respondent-university, the appellant filed a writ petition which came to be dismissed vide order dtd. 12/4/2018. Hence, this special appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that legality of second marriage of the deceased employee with Smt. Kamla is doubtful and therefore, compassionate appointment could not have been offered to the respondent No.4. Learned counsel further submitted that name of respondent No.4 was not entered as a dependent in the service book of deceased employee therefore, he was not even eligible to be considered for compassionate appointment. Lastly, it was submitted that appellant was fully eligible and entitled to be considered for compassionate appointment in place of deceased employee, however, illegally ignoring his right of claiming compassionate appointment as per Rules of 1996, the respondent No.4 has been appointed on compassionate grounds in the respondent university vide office order dtd. 4/8/2005 against the post of Class-IV employee. It was thus prayed that the present appeal deserves to be allowed.