HARENDRA NARAYAN VERMA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by order dated 15.3.2013 passed in Civil Review No. 12 of 2012 alongwith Contempt Case (Civil) No. 765 of 2011, the appellant has approached this Court. The brief facts of the case are that, the mother of the appellant died-in-harness on 10.5.2010 and his father superannuated from service on 31.8.2010. The appellant submitted an application dated 22.9.2010 seeking appointment on compassionate ground. The application of the appellant was forwarded on 30.12.2010 and finally recommendation for appointment of appellant on Class-ill post was made in the meeting held on 28.2.2011 of District Compassionate Committee. The said decision was communicated to all concerned on 11.3.2011. However, when no offer of appointment was made to the appellant, the appellant approached this Court by filing W.P. (S) No. 5100 of 2011, which was disposed of by order dated 21.9.2011 directing the authorities to appoint the appellant on a Class-Ill post Thereafter, the State of Jharkhand preferred Civil. Review No. 12 of 2012 challenging the order passed by learned Single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 5100 Of 2011. In the meantime, the appellant preferred a contempt petition, being Cont. Case (Civil) No. 765 of 2011. Both the cases, Civil Review No. 12 of 2012 and Cont. Case (Civil) No. 765 of 2011, were heard together and disposed of by common order dated 15.3.2013.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that on perusal of circular dated 5.10.1991 indicates that dependent of a person who died-in-harness would be entitled for appointment on compassionate ground. Clause 1(d) of the circular dated 5.10.1991 though provides that no compassionate appointment of a dependent in case both the parents were in Government service would be made. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the circular dated 5.10.1991 does not indicate the relevant date on which applications seeking appointment on compassionate ground has to be considered more particularly, when in the present case as on the date when the application seeking compassionate appointment was preferred by the appellant on 22.9.2010, the mother of the appellant had died and the father of the appellant had also superannuated from service.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent-State of Jharkhand submitted that at the time when appellant submitted application seeking appointment on compassionate ground, the appellant did not disclose that his father was in Government service and therefore, in the proceedings of District Compassionate Committee, held on 28.2.2011, his name was recommended. However, when this fact came to the knowledge of the authorities, in the proceeding held on 24.5.2011, a decision was taken to get the matter inquired into and in the proceeding held on 28.6.2011 the claim of the appellant for appointment was rejected. Learned counsel for the respondent-State of Jharkhand has thus submitted that as on the date when the mother of the appellant died, since the father of the appellant was in service, the appellant was not entitled for compassionate appointment in terms of circular dated 5.10.1991.