UNION OF INDIA Vs. MANISH YOGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has preferred this civil writ petition aggrieved with the order dtd. 2/12/2021 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (for short 'the learned Tribunal') in OA No. 604/2018, whereby the Original Application of the respondent-applicant was allowed and the order dtd. 16/8/2018 passed by the petitioners was quashed and the petitioners were directed to consider the case of the applicant-respondent for compassionate appointment in light of RBE circular dtd. 30/12/2019, if he is otherwise found fit for appointment on compassionate grounds.

(2.) It is contended by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the RBE circular dtd. 30/12/2019 could not be given a retrospective effect. It is also contended that order dtd. 16/8/2018 was passed in furtherance of the RBE circular dtd. 21/3/2018. It is also contended that if the RBE circular dtd. 30/12/2019 was given retrospective effect then RBE circular dtd. 21/3/2018 should also be given retrospective effect and in that case the respondent-applicant was not entitled for compassionate appointment as he was son of second wife of the deceased-railway employee.

(3.) It is contended by counsel for the respondent-applicant that the railway employee died on 16/3/2016 and an application for compassionate appointment was filed on 12/4/2016. It is contended that initially vide letter dtd. 9/6/2017, the prayer for compassionate appointment was declined in view of circular RBE No. 01/1992 dtd. 2/1/1992. It is also contended by counsel for the respondent-applicant that RBE circular No. 01/1992 dtd. 2/1/1992 was challenged before the High Court of Calcutta by Namita Buldar and Anr. and the Calcutta High Court quashed the RBE circular. It is also contended that the similar view was taken by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay and ultimately the Hon'ble Apex Court has upheld these judgments and orders passed by the Bombay High Court.