M.V.V. PRAKASH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed for quashing the order dated 1.11.2013 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Circuit Bench at Ranchi, in O.A.No.124/2012(R), whereby the CAT dismissed the original application filed by the petitioner holding that the petitioner is not legally entitled to be considered for compassionate appointment in view of the specific bar.

(2.) The father of the petitioner, Sri M.Narasinga Rao, was a permanent employee of the Railways and when he was posted as Tech. II under SSE(C&W) BNDM, he was missing on and from 11.12.2001 for which FIR dated 7.6.2002 was lodged and a certificate was issued on 15.1.2003, wherein it was certified by the Railway authorities that his father namely, M.Narasinga Rao, has been absenting himself from duty unauthorizedly from 11.12.2001 till date. M.Narasinga Rao had earlier married one Mylapalli Sokhubhayi and out of the first marriage, he had one daughter named Pukkalla Radha and the said Pukkalla Radha is married to one Suresh. The petitioner's mother, Uma Devi, is the second wife of M.Narasinga Rao. As per the documents submitted by Uma Devi, mother of the petitioner, all the payments of the ex-employee was drawn in her favour. However, after receipt of the application from the petitioner for compassionate appointment, during investigation of the case by the Senior Personnel Inspector, it was revealed that Mylapalli Sokhubhayi was the first wife of M.Narasinga Rao and she expired on 20th December, 2005. In response to the Railways letter, mother of the petitioner submitted reply dated 20.1.2011 stating that only after her marriage, she came to know about her husband's earlier marriage with Mylapalli Sokhubhayi and their daughter, Pukkalla Radha. The employment assistance on compassionate ground was refused to the petitioner as per Railway Board's Circular RBE No.01/92, which states that children through the second wife shall be entitled to the settlement dues but not for employment assistance on the ground that such marriage is to be considered null and void. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed O.A No.124/2012.

(3.) Following the judgment of the Jharkhand High Court passed in W.P(S) No.4461/2008 (Basanti Devi & Ano.) and batch cases, the CAT dismissed O.A No.124/2012 holding that since the Railway administration issued Circular RBE No.1/92 on 2.1.1992 that the children through the second wife shall not be eligible for compassionate appointment and since there is specific bar, the petitioner is not entitled to be considered for compassionate appointment.