SANTOSH MANDAL Vs. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment rendered by learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. (S) No. 1595 of 2005 ED.- 2010 1 JLJR 61 dated 16th September, 2009, in support of his contention that in similar circumstances when the compassionate appointment of the said petitioner was terminated acting upon directions passed in the case of Mithilesh Kumar by this Court, learned Single Judge interfered with the same having found that there was no illegality in the said appointment.

(3.) Learned counsel for the Respondent-NIT has submitted that the petitioner was 9 years of age admittedly at the time of death of his father on 7th July, 1989 and the widow of the employee, late Jagdish Mandal, in fact represented for compassionate appointment of another elder brother of the petitioner, namely, Sri Kant Mandal in the year 1990 itself. The application for appointment of the petitioner was made in July, 2000 after delay of 11 years from the date of death of employee. The purpose of giving compassionate appointment to ward off misfortune that has fallen on a family of deceased employee would be defeated if such belated appointments are made on compassionate grounds. It is further submitted that a Committee undertook an exercise to examine individual cases of such appointment and it came to a finding upon which show cause was issued to the petitioner, which cannot be said to amount to a premeditated state of mind to terminate his service. It is further submitted that the petitioner having been appointed after 12 years after death of the employee in harness, cannot have legally sustainable right to remain in employment under compassionate grounds. The case of the petitioner is distinguishable from that of Sudhanshu Sekhar ED.-Reported in 2010 (1) JLJR 61.