LAWS(JHAR)-2015-2-222

UNION OF INDIA Vs. SHAMBHU

Decided On February 04, 2015
UNION OF INDIA Appellant
V/S
SHAMBHU Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENT -applicant (for short referred to as applicant) sought quashment of letter No. DSC -37/Class -III/252/05/08 dated 16th October, 2008 issued by the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, E.C. Railway, Dhanbad, (for short 'E.C. Railway'), whereby the case of the applicant for his appointment on compassionate ground was rejected primarily on the ground that he is not the adopted son of late Tara Devi, Ex -Safaiwala and Keshar Balmiki. This gave cause to the applicant to knock the door of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Circuit Bench at Ranchi (for short CAT). Learned CAT, after taking into account all the relevant documents put forward by either side, held that the applicant, who was a child of few days and picked up from a dustbin by late Tara Devi and her husband and brought up by them as their son, whose name is also reflected in certain official records of the petitioner, was entitled to consideration for appointment on compassionate ground in accordance with the rules. Aggrieved of the said order passed by the learned CAT, E.C. Railway is before us through the mention of the instant petition. We have heard Mr. Sudhir Kumar learned counsel appearing for the Railway and Mrs. M.M. Pal, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant. Counter to the instant petition has also been filed by the applicant, in which all the documents, which were filed by the applicant before the CAT, are annexed with. We have gone through the entire materials carefully.

(2.) NOT only the applicant has been shown as nominee of late Tara Devi in the service record available with E.C. Railway, name of the father of the applicant as Keshar Balmiki also figures in the Matriculation Certificate issued way back in the year 1995. Even in the Caste Certificate issued in the year 1993, the name of the father of the applicant is reflected as Keshar Balmiki. These documents can not be doubted at this stage.

(3.) VIEWED thus, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order of the learned CAT calling for our indulgence on any count. The instant petition, therefore, merits dismissal at the admission stage itself. Ordered accordingly.