RAKESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJ. AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved of the order dated 3rd November, 2007, declining the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds; the petitioner has instituted the present writ application with a prayer for a direction to the respondents to accord appointment to the petitioner on compassionate grounds commensurate with his qualification and eligibility for his father Late Shri Karan Singh, a regular employee of Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (for short, 'AVVNL'), died while working as Assistant -II, in the office of Ajmer DISCOM, at Pilani on 20th January, 1996.

(2.) Briefly, the skeletal material facts essential for appreciation of the controversy are that father of the petitioner Late Shri Karan Singh, died on 20th January, 1996, while an employment of AVVNL. It is pleaded case of the petitioner that he was a school student aged about 8 years at the time of his father's death. His date of Birth is 4th January, 1988. The petitioner's mother though was entitled for compassionate appointment but for her ill -health and mental condition, she did not apply for any employment. The petitioner has now acquired the age of majority and passed his Senior Secondary Examination from the Board of Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Ajmer, in the year 2005, with First Division and has also acquired National Trade Certificate in the trade of Computer Operator and Programme Assistant in the month of July, 2006. The petitioner, therefore, submitted his application for appointment on compassionate grounds on 22nd February, 2006, followed by a reminder on 16th October, 2007. It is further contended that the action of the respondents in declining the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds, vide communication dated 3rd November, 2007, is absolutely illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable. Responding to the communication declining the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds, the petitioner again requested the respondents vide communication dated 21st February, 2012, followed by a notice for demand of justice through counsel dated 25th February, 2013, for appointment on compassionate grounds but the effort made evoked no response.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterating the pleaded facts and grounds of the writ application, asserted that since the petitioner was a minor school going student at the time when his father died while in service of AVVNL, and the mother was not keeping good health and was mentally disturbed, therefore, she did not stake her claim for appointment on compassionate grounds. However, at present the family was in dire need of financial assistance, and therefore, the petitioner submitted his claim for appointment on compassionate grounds after having acquired the age of majority and was in possession of the required educational qualification. It is further contended that the elder brother of the petitioner is not supporting the family, and therefore, the family is in dire need of financial support, hence, the petitioner is entitled to the appointment on compassionate grounds.