CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION Vs. MOHABBAT ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Central Board of Secondary Education challenging the award of Labour Court, Jaipur dated 28.4.1994. Labour Court by the aforesaid award answered the reference with regard to validity of removal of respondent -workman by the petitioner from their service.

(3.) SHRI R.P. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that appointment of the respondent -workman was wrongly made on compassionate ground because his father has already retired on 28.2.1983 and he died thereafter on 2.5.1986. The respondent -workman submitted application for compassionate appointment on 7.11.1989 and on that basis he was appointed on 9.11.1989. Since his father did not die in harness, the respondent could not be appointed on compassionate ground. Learned Counsel submitted that the respondent secured such appointment by misrepresentation and by suppression of fact. Referring to documents enclosed with rejoinder and copy of the affidavit of the respondent, which the respondent filed before Labour Court, it was submitted that the respondent before Labour Court wrongly stated that he was appointed because his father died while serving the petitioner. Learned Counsel referred to provision of Rule 15 of Manual of the Rules and Regulations of CBSE and argued that appointment on compassionate ground could be made only of a relation of employee, who dies in harness. Learned Labour Court has failed to appreciate this aspect of the matter and erred in law while holding the termination of respondent as illegal. Learned Counsel referring to Condition No. 4 of the appointment order dated 9.11.1989 and argued that in the appointment order it was clearly stated that appointment was purely on temporary basis and it was being made against a post, term of which was not likely to be extended and, therefore, it could be brought to an end at any time without any notice. Learned Counsel submitted that appointment of the respondent was against a temporarily created post which could be brought to an end as stipulated in condition No. 4 of the appointment order. It is, therefore, prayed that writ petition be allowed and the impugned award be quashed and set aside.