Central Administrative Tribunal - Mumbai
Sjata Sudhir Thorat vs M/O Defence on 6 March, 2019
i OA 1302019
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH, MUMBAI
he
ORIGINAL APPLICATION: No.130/20198
. ye
Dated this the ©G day of March, 2019
CORAM: R.N. SINGH, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
TR
mt. Sujata Sudhir Thorat,
ge: 45 years, |
W/o Late Shri Sudhir Dnyanoba Thorat,
who was working as Mazdoor,
tn the office of the Garrison Engineer,
(CME} Dapodi, CME PO, Kirkee,
Pune-4113l
R/At: $.No.164/6, Road No.14,
Near Gorpade $.T.D. Booth, Tingre Nagar,
Pune-411032.
i
Applicant.
(Advocate Shri K.K. Waghmare }
1. Union ef India,
Through The Secretary,
Ko Ministry of Defence,
© South Block,
New Delhi-L1loogl.
2. Engineer-in-Chiefs BR,
Army Headquarters,
Kashmir House, DRO PO,
New Delhi-11OO11.
3. The Chief Engineer,
Headquarters,
Sautern Command,
Dakshin Kaman Marg,
Pune-411 001.
4, Chief Engineer,
Pune Zone, Sir Majekji Mehta Road,
Pune-411 001.
to
4
5. Garrison Engineer,
{CME} Dapodi, CME PO,
Kirkes, Pune-S11031.
{Advocate : None }
27.02.2019
6G O%. mate
Reserved on :
Pronounced on :
ORDER
Per : R.N. Singh, Member (J)
OAUSG2019 xs Respondents --
This O.A. has been fried by the applicani\\) 19 of the Act, 1985 seeking for the following reliefs t-
"a), To allow this Original Apelication.
b}. fo direct the Respondent 3 1.8.
Chief Engineer Southern Command to re-
consider the case of the Agpiioant for appointment on compassionate grounds and passed a detailed and speaking order.
a}. Po direct fhe Respondents to K given an appointment to the appiicant on o> campassionate ground.
a), Fo pass any other order in the interest of Justice.
ee). To award cest.*
2. The brief facts of the case as contended on behalf of the applicant are that Late Sudhir Dyanoba Thora was working as Mazdoor ain the office of Respondent No.4 i.e. Garrison Engineer a pe ?
CME, Pune Administrative Tribunals 5 16.01.2002 © © OA 1T30/2019 lad leaving behind bis wife and two unmarried sons.
Tt is stated that after the death of the deceased > employee the family received terminal benefits of a Rs.i,07,079/- and basic pension of Rs.1,275/- per month. There be property that may yield inceme for survival of the family. Immediately after the death of her husband she submitted an application on 14.06.2002 for appointment on compassionate 'ground for herself enclosing all the requisite documents. It is stated that her case for appointment on compassionate ground has been considered for apout twelve times and speaking orders were passed on 23.92.2003, 28.10.2003, 28.12.2003, 31.02.2004, bh 28.04.2004, 27.08.2004, 30.10.2004, 17.03.2005, 43.04.2005, 07.07.2005 and 16.08.2005. The copy of the last order passed by the respondents on 16.08.2005 is enclosed as (Annexure A-~i} to this OBR. It is specifically stated that earlier eleven speaking orders passed by the respondents while considering her case have not been annexed for the sake of brevity.
3. Tt is further stated by the applicant that fr?
as per the above mentioned speaking orders, it is no agricultural land or any other 4 | OA.130/2019 appears. that her case has been considered along with other candidates by duly constituted Board of Officers and her name has mot bean recommended by the Board for appointment on compassionate grounds due to more deserving cases and no vacancies were available. If there were no vacancies, it cannot be said that her case has been considered as such, it construed that her case for appointment has not at all been considered by the respondents © However, as per the OM dated 26.07.2012 (Annexure 75] he A-2}) i8s8u ay by the DoPésTt the limitation of three years for consideration of the casas for appointment on compassionate ground has been withdrawn. Therefore, she preferred an application dated 05.09.2017 | (Annexure AW3) before the Respondent No.3 for reconsideration of her casq for appointment on compassionate ground. However, vide order dated 26.10.2017 {Annexure A-4) her case was rejected due to more deserving cases and non-availability of vacancies. Tt is the eentention of the applicant that the limitation of } : . ~ neodt oye three Years £Or appointment on SOMPassr.onate s ground has already been. withdrawn vide DoPaT OM dated 26.07.2012 ksseping in view the judgment ~& 5 -- OAANYV2019 dated 07.05.2010 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.13162/2010 by Hon'ble Allahabad High Court wherein it has been held that the appointment has been denied only on the ground that for three years no vacancy could be found in 53 quota and thus the case was closed. The Han'ble High Court of Allahabad has also directed to create the supernumerary post for considering the cases of compassionate appointment in case the vacancies are not available.
4, The applicant has further Stated that in a similar case O.A.No.588/2011 Amit Chandrakant Barathe vs. Union of India & Others this Tribunal vide it order dated 11.12.2012 (Annexure A-5) allowed the OA and the 'respondents have also complied with the order and have also submitted their compliance report through M.A.No.901/2013. he MA was disposed of by this Tribunal vide its }. Th as the as order dated 28.02.2014 (Annexure A-~ contention of the applicant that her case has not been considered on the similar grounds which is arbitrary, discriminatory and jillegai and against the findings of the Hon'bie High Court. of Rllahabad. Hence, this OA.
fs OA.130/20195. I have heard the learned counsel for the = applicant at l&ngth, gone through the 0.A. along with Annexures A-1l to A-6 and have considered the e facts and circumstances and law points involved in the case.
Findings
6. The respondents are also well within their te rights to consider the case of applicant as p Ss the policy and it does not create any statutory right to the applicant. The applicant after the i death of her husband Late Sudhir Dyanoba Thorat on 16.01.2002, she submitted an application dated 14.06.2002 for appointment on compassionate ground ae for herself enclosing all the requisite documents.
The family Consists OF herself and two unmarried.
o sons... Sha receive ed terminal benefits oF Rs.l, 079/~ and basic pension of Rs. 1,275/- per month. Her case for appointment on compassionate ground has been considered for about twelve times and finally rejected on 16.08.2005 (Annexure A-1).
AS per the OM dated 26.07.2012 (Annexure A- 2} issued by the tOP&T through which the limitation of three years For consideration of the cases tor appointment on F.. OA.130/2019 compassionate ground has been withdrawn as such ~ she moved = an; application dated 05.09.2017 {Annexure A-3} 'before the Respondent No.3 for reconsideration af her case for appointment on compassionate ground which was rejected vide order Gated 26.10.2017 (Annexure A-4) stating therein that her case was rejected due to more deserving cages and non-availability of vacancies. She has on a. Similar case ian be Qo a also olaced re O.A.No.588/2011 Amit Chandrakant Barathe vs. Union of India € Others which was allowed by this Tribunal vide its order dated 11.l2. 2 ig. The same was also complied with by the respondents.
7. The applicant in the present case has oved her first representation for appointment on compassionate ground on 14.06.2002 after the death ws of her hudband on 16.01.2002. Thereafter, her case for appointment on compassionate ground has been considered for about twelve times and finally rejected on 16,08.2 60S (Annexure A-i}). Thereafter, she waited for a long time and when she came to knowledge about the Oo" dated 26.07 2012 (Annexure A-2) issued by DBoPaT then she moved again an application dat ad 08.09.2017 (Annexure A-3) after g OA130/2019 about thrteen years after the final order passed in her case arta after about fifteen years after the death of her husband before the Respondent No.3 for reconsideration of her case for appointment on compassionate ground which was rejected vide order dated 26.10.2017 (Annexure A-
4) stating that her case was rejected due to more. deserving cases and non-availabiiity of vacancies. The Hon'ble Apex Court particularly in the case ) S.S. Rathore v. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in i990 s¢cc {L&és) 50 has observed that unsuccessive representations cannot extend the MD period of limitation. Para 20 and 21 of the said i judgments is reproduced herein under "20. We are of view that the cause of Se aotuon shail be tekken to-arise not from © ° the @ate of the original adverse order but on the date when the order of the higher authority where 4a statutory remedy is provided entertaining the appeal or representation is made and where na such order is made, though the remedy has been aveiled of, & si nts' period from the date oF p af the apreal oor maxing o resentation. shail .pbe faken to when cause of ection ahaili bs ve first arisen. We, However, eiees chat this princigie applicable when the remedy availed ef has aot bean providsad by Law. Repeated unsuccessful representations not provided by Jaw are net governed by this principle.
CLLULLLTLL ATOLL TULOTULTTLLTLLLLLLLLLLLLLELL TT 8 . QOA,130/2019 2i. Ft @S appropriate te netice the provision regarding limitation under Section ai of the Administrative Tribunals Ac, Sub Secticn (1) has prescribed a period of one year for making of the .apolication and power oF condenation of delay of a total period of six months has been vested under sub-
*s section {2}. The civil ceurt yurisdiction sas been taken away Dy th 3 B th g Act and, therefore, as far as government! servants are cnancerned, Articlé 58 may "not be invoosble in view of the special jimitation. Yet, suits eutsicde the purview of the Administrative Tribunals' Act shall centinue to be governed by Article 58,
8. On the point of limitation, the Hon'ble os Npex Court has reiterated its earlier view on this ty.
matter in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. A. Durairayj reported in Jf 2011 {3) SC 254 and held as underi-
Re: Question(i}
13. # is well settled that anyone who feels aggrieved by non-promotion or non-selection should ss approach the Court/Tribunal as early as possible. ae C _ fa person having a justifiable grievance allows the matter to become stale and approaches the Court/Tribunal belatedly for grant of any relief on the basis of such belated application would lead te serious administrative complications to the employer and difficulties to the other employees as it will upset the settled position regarding senionty and promotions which has been granted to others ' over the years. Further, where a claim is raised beyond a decade or two from the date of cause of action, the employer will be a great disadvantage of effectively contest er counter the claim, as the officers who dealt with the matter and/or the relevant records relating to the matter may no longer be available. Therefore, even if no period of limitation is prescribed, any belated challenge would be Hable to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.
9. The question of limitation being nullified UII LLL LUELLA with the 5 An in Lon OA.130/2019 rt £3 order rece ba m va 2b a resen an Sarkar {77 2008 ng Apex Ca rey "
ng representation was MLK, ae ~ gett ',
-
i'ble £ pend 1G Ho and the OA by the cide a 2010(2) SCC 58} and held * 2g S50 examined He n te wore + A :
Pid 4 io of Union of India v.
< ae, Le by £ direct ak case {15) SC 70 sre} cS "SO OO La OP Obes Dra OU i Ge moe oy te ke Ob Gp et kp OQ gop Oo be OP ig AL MG 4 cog * Tose ea eg Coa mR bss Org "4 ca G fi. a3 ny Ba ky vied "rh Py ving 4S Ce rd o 43 gy Gora ch ay Wet By O @ a z= o 4 Ge Pas hy A Bo yy cee me a of Si og TE mE % MOM Ob oa oe Wom mo sc 2 @ Pon Bo S 8 ty & BO! 4 6, 2 3 x Qu Wy Bom wea . wy 4g ct Be ce a oF BA ot G me OM gy BG Nod tor DO oe TH gy "4 qn ead GE a a. Og! a Bm sa Oe OH ag ony seg Oe ey OU "rd my ot ah 2s Ear "gap Sy oO 9 U fe do 2 Oe. Mg & os BG as eet pea OF so 4 -y to me oy Sy G Eo posed gah es att ' Ad 5 C3 ay 4 $a vot AE te OR ey my . wt Gy OM ae oo -G , aati @y cha 9 ge Bae 0 wy. ty Ht t oe ey ty be he hs ge Ty <4 ® ay ond oe Ry omg 2 ~ % m5 caren % oy mye OM ed oy Sg ew OP en Ss BO Sy rh wy & 9 eg Plt @ BOY Bea GO iy ge Bo gO BM oor fee "th S a wy ES 373 by oF og C3 be <i ogy BO any my ce ETB Bo Bm G a Big Beppo og %. @a FoR agave s6 a ay m9 BS Bh 6 BO 3 Gay m4 6 wh OO Song alo gy mS Bh vey EOE Bog cy eo Mos hy rd he fs 2G OR a & "
Sry Mo tp | 3s . 2. wi my ag OG RO OO 8G A Go al v4 BO Dos oS rN MET tet 3" os WN. Dey PO Gy oO & Br OQ OF ee oa 2 us oy 43 A GW g Ota wow The gy By 4 FE mt mA eG Rg he ty rd ae gf oy TE Sa gy ce Ee a 3 Mi a & a ge SN OR aa MOO BT gay 3 op Eley a % WSO GO eHow oe mp ee a ba Co 4b ay, ie 35 64. 8 Be i My Bet oH , PS ae pes oO So Ging AO wy Ut Gl w ¢ . ny 8 4 FO CONS Horry rey BS Eon} OG i oct OH Sg Hw ty 7 mg Oo Tw OBB a Gor eo Moor &. O @ " Gian G 8 Op B Poh eg w ay fH 0 oS OC ay ty * Y AS ha ® % 4 aS gor bb 4 Cy a Doig UA ol @ oO @ B fe tt oe Ge om HM 4d ge 4S Gee i Be ONG og Meet Bo GE Ba cep OS ay fy 4} "Ow HoH M A G4 D nse wm "ny ony Nog beg GU ge fk gp kb a 43 ce Of Sa. a 2 gon hy 32 gr % Beck ye ud ed UG UP OTS gg Gy Bo ao e So Se aU Be G & Bone TH. iy Soom Gu Om 4 BBE wy S ns a 8G toe Ga Dims ey Ch SO OH Soe aoa Ba G 2 © wy ce BG "1 yy He ta t, @ Qo kere Big om yo cp Rs rye SD a is Bm oa 2 Bo Oo & Bas SO 82D oo Oo se ew a8 SS On 8 OM Nea Oo go OO Oa GM Os OO GEG Ge Woo a2 a Sw OG BU SOP Os 0 GO 6 OG Be 4 4 th om ng Bee OR wR U DO OF G4 Ben COLELLO Y Wo OA 1302019 oI GS TA faa Ct jas iC tt Ee Q, {5 bp, by 1B Cy ct x would be legal fe Therefore, in the light of the discussion made above the present OA is liable to be dismissed on che ground of - delay and latches. However, =I have though it necessary to consider the claim on merits as well.
LO. The Hontble Supreme Court in the case of Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. v. Anil Dadykar & Ors. {(2009) 13 SCC 112}, wherein it WAS held that it cannot be held that the appointment cannect be claimed ox offered, after a lagse of time, when the crisis is Over,
11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court im the case of General Manager, SBI and Anr. v. Anju Jain {(2008) 8 Scc 475}, has held that apoointment on .compassionate grounds is not a right. However, the scheme of compassionate appointment is an exception and the same x is to be provide oy strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions of the scheme. The phitosophy behind giving compasSionate ap pointment is just te % help the family in harness to get over the immediate erisis due to the loss of sole breadwinner. This category 0 th appointment cannot be claimed as a matter of right fter certain period, when the crisis is over, More oe so, the financial status of the family is also to se 12 OA 1320/2019 looked into as per the acheme framed by the employer while. giving compassionate appointment and such appointment cannot be conferred contrary at to the parameters of the scheme.
12. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Santosh Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. & Ors. {2009 § meant to 5+ {6} Scc 483}, held that the scheme provide immediate financial assistance to family which has lost its bread winner and request £oQ oye ould be prox.
compassionate appointment s i mate to employee's death and compassionate appointment is not a bonanza or another source of recruitment, and it cannot be claimed as a matter of right.
13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State Bank of India v. Raj Kumar, (2010) 11 SCc¢ 661, elucidating the nature of the scheme of compassionat() appointments observed: "It is now well settled that appointment on compassionate grounds is net a curce of recruitment. On the other hand it is an i rt ment to pr exception to the general rule that recru Sublic services should be on the basis of merit, by an open invitation providing equal opportunity to all eligible persons to participate in the selection process. The dependants of employees, Witte 13 . OA.130/2019 who die in harness, do not have any special claim or right to employment, except by way of the concession that 'may be extended by the employer under the rules or "by a Separate scheme, to enable. the family of the deceased to get over the sudden Financial crisis. The claim for compassionate appointment is therefore traceable only to the scheme framed by the employer for such employment and there is no right whatsoever outside such ae oy < SCHEME .
14. The Hon' ble Supreme Court in the case of Local Administration Department & Anr. vs. M. Seivanayagam @ Kumaravelu, Civil Appeal No.No. 2206 OF 2006 dscided on 65.04.2011 has observed as under:t-
- ; = "Tt jas been said 4 number of times aon Peer Bosh ; eet ber Biss recalled hoe res. Sari ler Duo 20 HReeas CoO He LSCsgi Led. nere that under the scheme of compassionate appointment, in case of an empieyee dying an = oooh. Tdayi hal: ae } fe Ad RATE AES $i WA et Rl ee ae os ea tat in harness one of his eligible dependents is given @ job with the sole objective te a : os - ae ay As 3 ": Po : F provide immediate succour te the family which may suddenly find itself in dire straite @€S a resuit of the death of the bread winner, An apoointment made many years after the death of the employee or * 2 te See without due consideration ef ehe : : ' tm hd I hy oy ys financial resources avaiiabla te Ais/her dependents and the financial deprivation
-- a ~ ~ ~ ~, de we eaused to the dependents as & resuih of Sm ae adm? because bre Soa fee his death, 34 Mav Decdyse ENE CLlaiNane happened te be one of the dependents of he deceased employee would be directiy B ¥ in confiliet with Articies I4 & 16 of the Constitution and hence, quite bad and a mS 4, x of Jagdish t OA130/2019 Case e % ¢ x t ZR < 4 £ ision 14 Bihar (1996) 1 scc 301 ealing 2 6
-
In another ,dec State of upreme 3 ot te nible ¥ &
15. Prasad v.
Ho © © £ & TO 1 eo MO uw « a 43 Oy oO ed © 5a a ey . ort $3 43 © 4 i H »o Y ££ @ & hy D D G G $4 ' GE Bow Oo Oo yd & GY wo Dw & Ms bm gD ved bs AR SS QD Apt Ch TR Ry Oy 8 Pom hat oO red 3 o a td * s og Nowe oon 440 0y f» IN 43 WM eda > a Hh oe 4 xy o 43 ced ee ee gy EE 43 Bi 5 n .
~G 8 By 8 1 BB a haa % 2 "cf By ty or wy a gt Ba Pug Beg 0 Be » 4 guafegseusee Seofm 6 Moet ad 6 fe pan Sa Ee SS 4h 8 © C3 5 oO Mes im soa ee ba, z GH 5 Bop < "
ge . F coe a mie 7° 5 % my me ns! ASB Ss saga. 2 3 & & 4 "og 8 G@& ¢ a8 PF 80 8 yd. 8 ao BO mW 2 ms g ee gy OH et Sy 8 8s ag y -¢ "in @ Bo ge iy iB Sey 4 OD "4 ay 4 "4 'G eo% oR ,8 o B® ee ee GS fe os 4 4. " f = os "fe % UP ae Pew a sg ~2 582 "3 Gos 2B 3 e S O ve se iw tS rs zy oy mH a 6 C a Bd e "4 % « pe - 34, 4 8 a & 8 3 3 a 43 G, a o te. Ee ag © Pt he Ta : -
a, ta JS q G a é oo a ea Ap kde © a3 % Ni E a ad as Qs ae > Bae BR e 44D ote 2 & 2 4a ® fm Pe Soe GSB RG © ne fy M$ we Gf Oo © Pm gy fg % é @ ; Or E SS Ky a oO ; eB Gea DY r BN yp te HM Oy Oo a8 te ei me Y be Y SA go Eg 'A o e 4 o ;
" B 3 eo o B oof ts ' - ny e i> ° O G a8 gaye Seba Zs Go Oo ® ki nn i & % ay Gt eR Gy a © m4 a < Gos ag D mo a) % & w . <4 j gt #-f eo ty, a 4 iy : is o NA a a a4 fag 8 Og GOW ag os G c a ' c "
cy aoe Reo a Og g e a © 2 % 44 & g AE mg EP aS ty Oo as SS ww "G as G e Bap OP Oa pe Oa #4 44 ER Ws Oe a) Yi emp £3 totam oO GO By ha yormqp | : are a , g 4 2eOGb4 O86 6 Ueda Qs BOM DU DS © A ge ° RAM BE oO! ZRESAZGRESS BSS Boe we wll ebay "OE Ted is3 gah im RM AL ca wy ag As OAS AB. my AQ 8p 2 * st hes vt co OQ By YU eer a OO GO OG doen SRR G 4 Dow 4 O md ® a sp 3 be a 3 pond re) wg f im sf 4 bd ec te pe wo Sey i DY oe ort © fo a t% a yO He it a 4 , D eed cs "rd rm) < % css rf mn w bg 4 $4 Sa @ a rt o 4 mn 4d $4 ie) udgment :
» OA AT30/2019 Aid 4 * tl me a evant portion 3 Rel is reproduced below emergency.
a4 a © & $5 hi 43 oS q OF } SOO Ot Ge Qe et oY GO a " * Dui OC HM & Oo BPO Gy Nh D sed hk EL RL Rhy Kp re OC MD ee 8 Ga a ; by SO Rp Mp 42 Dord BE Ed AY tw 42 42 Tp gb <6 & ce Bho cm Dee Th om A ty a, @ dog TE fy % i 53 ode og 7 4 wy iy SN fe tp 4s 63 By th "3 SO by Bere we Lg eh % TH gy G Aor By, 3 Hay 3 O @ st ts, eer co a: BOO Bey ® a ae Sa BEG RY A, BOR Ge Ge "3 5° ~G OE BS eon tS eB gee "Some wah eg Boas ms, UMM EE g Om Ag a Tog S853 ea Bena SG eas S yD ow * wag engage ee Bh es a gos ae grt BOO om a G £3 . Oo a TY get G3 43 m4 Oy a wy Sy, Oa gy g a ot Thy ae vf tp SEE Bod % a a Oey gy 7G oy DOE apy mo ® wt a " sey? ay RE ee. OE ta tS j . « ? ek ees , ¢ act oak 2s 2 2a & "S oaS @ Hoe ty BH BO BS BB gag 3 3 m3 st Dre" eo. Be s ra r og g Oo Blaha PRB 2 S ego She By 98 "62,8 BF BS SF TS Bays hye A antges Sg " " 43 mr s . gee Go a ae Be Sm Eee SURa, aXe FON o o TEggleys SS a ae seh Sy 4 4 oo 4 A ee Gye YD SM we a FOR po AD , oO + w SQ TG Mg a 3 6 eos Gm , e O 4 QR 5 BB 8 me @ ag a cet yy B® we Ban # aH dd O 4 BR. eS Gq GB. OA. a Sgr on Oe 8 BO MM gu 8 "7 or 62 a MG BA NS Se eges . Ser ues en gs kh ae m Re 2% _ 8 4 FASE SLR Peles snssoyenrs we GS 4 SESS CR aS Eo ay 4 Moga ceeg 4 te 4 aon : ' ' Ra ta - i ed ee Som 2 go he g "a as O mS 5 Oo 3 & Be Boy i, Bo Ss, ® a Ch ta toc o% a . m cee Mi GES 5 t xy ey ty KE By May et mek wi 4d i. Es ob ag Beg ey, Pa do Pio Sy F Bae , How aS g BERT ow 4 mE gon SIP GS af, bate 8. 0 a Mi a mw 3 2 BEA a Po a AD. An i Ay te ag 43 Qqgw e Ch my Fat Ge g Ot tg os we EM 5 om 8G gu BOK 6 na x * @B wo my 43 43 4a %; O DF as 98 oo. eg Bagh el SOs. OO 4 fc UL 8 we So Boe 7 me ASE Si, GOB Aeogn, alt aPeee ge & e 0 ME, GR Sagan DE AS 2a 8 26 54 ¢°3 Moke OO eg 7D ga, Sg O ory 4 © oO tat OS & sh mg HO ® «PREG Soo & So Sew Rn. o w Ae ausegeesgeeh *& oy ; a AD Sy Om Fi ee) nr; ee: G3 ome Bored mom © me 43 oO. BER Be So kante eos 28 855 6 gy 8 SHSeaogmey ge nga" Bas gry me @ EA ard eg Mong Oy ee Oo. Dp hy th wrt go Qe Oo F to Birt no ®O Ort toa gg BR Bab Ae ote Bo Oo Sd Bm Se bs eS Oe = o "PE OO HM WH OD my 43 SO O 8" On Sane ag h yu UO gina Oe oe, eS oS OD GOR EHH OWA GHA MOG ba Som GRR ORE eo Poe Ow oN 2 OW 8 AH Oo OHA or Oe we Gg I J Ay 2 HOS OO Gu GG OA 24 eG dy roy hy i 4 ~ x Rs c i ee O 4 8 rt.
© ] Mts :
2019¢ i e OA.130 16 ion af 94 (20010 has observed co mm th ae ws GW Dy 4 ty T&D & OG Gs oe Gm Oh yb wD #3 OMS Re a cet ot % yr ee a Me Oe ont Ww Bated WF Weg SX ney bd G0 mE ay oH iy aye ooh BS Ae De Et ord ha he SG As 4, © . 2 the ad 0 re ted oe OEE Es Ba te vr a Ps a a Steg ei Seg oy m4 Tl me OD ap ot Digg H TE x ® aa bs We toa H by, $4 53 mA wn @ a ca § be 43 wor 4 wm on 7 Ry fn \ he ag 9g 8 Ron i Go vs "4 ie 8 GU ig Vag Sree By g 8 ee gy % a a w $3 & C3 ju 4a 5 "9 3 Gig Be «Fay OA Zo, ia Yd 45 ny c 8 mS x ao o hd cs 4 6 St 45 > OS. a, Boas wd 4, oot s OB og, OF » & Boy D S "4 3 » Saray goes wu BY SG Ba oy hE ote DDS 43 0 @ 3 % B mee OS gg He oy BP oy wit g HB ew @ Eb oD vet Bg cet ot Z 43 = C3 3 Sa sa 7G ody 1 Oo ° "3 » Che gg @ ONS 4 @ * Oe y a 2 ay iy to a oy "rd Eg ty ty OY ay ER Woes pg 2a we 83 2 Mos b , » i e Ay, co "C% 3 weg AE ORE ey ~ ty san Bose ot DB t oe Sg ot eG 3 BA "rf % a 43 Bg" nb Game RB 8 fa mPa O ts * ke aD * Sef ; " < a SO oe vy et OY At 6 ep ge ° ait " gw BH ® % 4 Q iy C5 & Noo, Se BP oe ose yo aga bo. & a 5a x ye G vr a © vet By og SE A Cg 3 oo Oo 53 93 ra bee 4d x pene % xed es ma ~ ey Be rt gn Shy ny mob & 3 ed Go. 4 be SN 3 3H mg GE By gy w * xe 5 "gs es 43 th ao Fon Bigg OOM gy re TF aI rod ony % a v fi, £8 es 5 , AD ay ae ao o« M4 % mo Bs Re ou . ri, 44 ae A a @ » Bose g OS Boy A 5 ON ewe Sy oN Od 3 0 BU OB a eg Pos OF "OS nts i EP gy hy yg A cA QD cpa hy 44 mee a SO ey ae Nou nd oo Q aG8 « % uy + 4 9 & cop gon ce pe 6 Re Dy oye PaO Sot af 3 a Me Q, eh gh a oO 9 ' a : Why 4 wg a a Ab os % Ge ce st He ty eng gy FD eo So Se ok ye a Ch ty ya by aU BS Boy oe gE f.ege"e hag "yey SB. e : og Sub Ss Be sy a ; tet aos 2S ga Sy : e a P42 oe BP lb we ath w Ny ® ® Dy ¥ a 2 & te OR % ogi A . ved . ft 3 oo eB og OOH i : 8 ag OG © © od a i SE whos MO te OG hey, "pb, M ye et o 3 US HOF os "8 ie G we wy oom 8 Dw my to td ™ @ a a 8 ""
. ent o ' aw x, GS os ny % ££ NOON ij fea Do ae i 44 ? 2 4 » a '< 4 4 "4 Po cm 4 & ret ove 4 . 3 . 4 a tv u a rq £ we 5 4a ty oy 3 By & te rd ER ER a OO hy oO we he t3" is) mS tayo g@hzke = Bs 2 Oo ge Ba 4 2 s Ls ty 4 dice om & 4 ve j Boy OD ie f aS Fs 5a, He 3 so {9 -2 OT Bt ® & D tt ye b 2 6h B 4 433 omy fay & a G Oe Ef we b wo ho, ty B44 @ 50,5 4 sed Sem mow Ro Aon 8 £ eRe O00 Qo & 43 By AE UY Top e $3, @ 3S ty, ty wm ye EY * a Vs.
18. Delhi DLT-746 the as under oe:
an oS S © cs Ms. th Mm a "ny + . Ky ot ( wy ord vy, am & 7H me o wa a HY GQ hpey x ty GO D A wm at Bo om Db « D ' By % wy ord s " 5 f - 3 ~ od = m4 3 a by & GS Wer @ Bet ww « Oe a a a Ge i % : a ma 6 = Om Baa mm me om Sco Buen GO GUUS PU Vso aa. oo "4 Y 3 oe Pwmw YB 4a 13 re 3 0 BS @-4 3 mow by ES ref oh & = ow he i py ° x eg so" Qed "a to Sy 4 ra ory a . 43 pe 4 Ts i gm Om OG fy "Ab Om oe gem OG 8 mG * Se ot OM Mie Bo i i ma ey Tt 3 OS Cp 4 @ te OG 43 ts . $d Ce et ted cee og ae ee 1 Ow Oo yPU ed | Bb } Bing , o a eb DB they 2 WY Bea Se os th > BD By oy Pd ag ord (& ye SO Os oa ea g ss me Ano et fs RT a a bo y Ot BS ee Bor Ry oe ® o 4 ap PP as YS tT ; seo ne Oe 5 6% @ @ Gg & Boo Ba as % a i rho Oo. OH te wm 9 a © a3 "4 a a 2 Qt : 2S a og ag a WOR, DR Oe Gg go i ta ie Ot rp me A ed ty map AL ODS ed tf my A Pa gs oan '4 % gy, i By <A hab omg veg gy Gh Or Rey 4 ify y "sg iG Bos by Bg Oa xy Pw Ge Bo 0; Ye ® ws Bn SE o Soe 8 YB My get OP Bg oo a 3 a a cS t Wa ty ey AP OSE ety Es 43 a O Ges 2 Bo Moa ma ye BO a % 45 ~ a 7B GG, a ogy 3 } : 2 oY ye UO Baye se] 4 ¢ O ' & aS Ox 2 ef e mp ky , @ a am ht ay . io me 4d se +4 t $ os i, * + 3 4 . oy z , eyed nD Cy wD oa' 3 voy AM By one +0 DB 4 'a to te io a 8 3 5 at 2 & os CO 4) 6 TE O <p. 7 . on ba o wey 43 ogy om a ay we 3 a ce md C St Ae Cy TL 4d oH + e ts 4.5 oH ey tf Gn ay ony c et Sey » ee as ay 4 es OE ened veg A OD + Sy se % > ra ory gp @ et bee G2 my, as OO og oe bh ts ms tH m «8h TR apg MA Om ne iy ond a a ' Cy ES mw ey ~~ "a & aS 43 ray oq me a pees a 3 5 ane > O, Bs O42 gq Bom Ha B" & ee ma < a 3 o Mt, ra . oy a3 i - © 3 "
mF BRy SG a ~ Gy ri © a ne ss a Se we te ~ oy "~ os 3 B Sy PD 8 i ay 4 © Hosa BR ow ® wy 4. @ g B Oy ee fy op St 4 dhe Gy MS gy % rit oy b 2 i Maes wy wy 3 sr 5 ee Wy Eg BOO oe ted ty oy Ss ag AR Som Os oO a x fa, a a Sy ™ b » oSA 4 » os s 5 P GH « 99 BO ws art og aS u a ots Yo go Ht om BB So eS a me gy FRO ge? My ae 6 _ od s a Ao. wae GON 2G «Sot BB OU My OT at ag O Bas tt Bw a, Bo. ; 4 oy ma gOS 8 fy ges RD a ag "Q Bf Sg GM 4B oy zy Le a MY Oo Bored <y © Mo Ey « oy Om ct 5, ay & ra a BO 4 At ty De qos BOM Sg oa Be ta ey Swe Geo, sb 8G Be gt ~ S og Hote 8S 43 as. kM dQ : Gey OB go Bg nO 4 oR ee A om ry sm aw gy io oo RE opy Dy Td La gs BG Ue By 6 BH oc q 2" 3 0 ¢ ey a © x GM rma "a ee TE Nk Hy @ eH © by FE A ty G3 GD wr w ccs 3 . HH é 4@ Oa 4s Bg nw OR Oo 43 ss M43 @ too 4 40 a de MD oy RO ce @ ct , £ ® ao son a BaP owe & Oo mG, A ce) SH & G ew 3 Gog OW aA Be we GM Oe eB: 2 3 0 ES @ RQ mp 2 7" 4g By ow Te 4 i Ce 4bcrg cep eed 42 GG DM borg th Y Gees oat ky ty ray "4 C of fs 2 9 ms OS cP 44 1 op S Spot ig OP Se PO ch OM. ge be oa as Bye ot Ss é ' Oo Sa tr SAW Sy -RGS BAER GER an kh GE OB 6 4 2 oO & si - 8 . . SG MG oO nm BS oH So YOR Or 6 OO gat ODEO RH OO Fo Mm ag SoH $i SE DB CE ag te Bd Oe Meee DOD eh U me Oh HH Tm OS wg OG % fb
19. OUTST, 18 OA. 30/2019, applicant has unfortunately expired on 16.01.2002 ° and more than k7 years have lapsed thereafter. The at family hes managed to maintain themselves. The sons left behind by the deceased might have settled in their life and now it may not he construed as sudden financial jerk requiring ass istance by way of grant of compassionate appointment.
~ . . ~<
20. In view of the discussions made above © well as the law settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Han'ble High Court, referred to above, I am of the opinion that the scope of compassionate appointment is restricted to the terms and conditions of scheme itseif and the same cannot be stretched by the Court(s)/Tribunal{s}. This apart, the delay is alse aA vital factor. The scheme WL compassionate appointment cannot be granted after @ reasonable period. Such being the consistent view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in respect of the scheme, the grounds raised in this OA deserve 5% no Further consideration. Therefore, in the Light Oo fF the discussions made above the applicant has failed to establish even & prima facie case hence, the OA ais liable to be dismissed on merits and e & i9 OA.130/2019 jaches.
3aiso) oon. 6the©6©6l6Uground©6l of--)6--ho delay =o and Recordingly, the. OA is dismissed on both counts.
No order as to costs.
nun singh) Member~-J amlt/~