Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras
S Deepan Rajesh vs Posts on 18 August, 2023
l OA 310/00296/2022 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL | CHENNAI BENCH 9A10/00296/2022 Dated the 1g day Friday of August Two Thousand Twenty Three CORAM : HON'BLE MS.MANJULA DAS, Member ) S. Deepan Rajesh, S/o. Late R.Sridhar, No.4/38, GST Road, Meenambakkam, Chennai -- 600 027. ee Applicant (By Advocate: M/s. N. Beula John Selvaraj) "Vs 1, Union of India, Superintendent, New Delhi Central Division, 2nd Floor, Meghdoot Bhavan, Link Road, New Delhi-- 110 001. Ww The Superintendent, RMS, Chennai Sorting Division, Chennai -- 600 008. 3. The Chief Postmaster, Tamil Nadu Circle, Chennai -- 600 002. 4. Chief Engineer (Navy), Military Engineer Service Station Road, Visakhapatanam -- 530 004. .. Respondents (By Advocate: Mr. R.S. Krishnaswamy) 2° OA 310/00296/2022 ORAL ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Ms. Manjula Das, Member(J)) This O.A. has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of Administrative Tribunai's Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:
"to call for the records of the impugned order issued by respondent, first respondent vide letter No. REP/47-3/20212 dated 4.7.2012, REP/31-9/2007 dated 19.02.2019 & B-I10/R. Sridhar dated 15.12.2020 and quash the same and direct the Respondents to give compassionate ground appointment in any suitable post to the applicant and to pass such other further orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice."
2. The brief facts of the case as submitted by the applicant are as follows:-
The applicant submits that he is the son of late R. Sridhar and the applicant father was employed as a Sorting Assistant in the i respondent and he was appointed in the year 14.03.1983 and died on 17.06.2007 while he was in service. After the death of the father, the applicant who is the younger son gave an application for compassionate ground appointment. Due to the sudden death of applicant's father, his family circumstances were very indigent and therefore, applicant approached the department for several times regarding the compassionate ground appointment. The respondent has not taken any action against the
3 OA 310/00296/2022 application submitted on compassionate ground appointment. The applicant states that his father expired on 17.06.2007 leaving behind surviving legal heirs as wife Grace, Sons Rajkumar and Deepan Rajesh and mother Sardha respectively. The applicant applied for Compassionate ground appointment in the year 2007. Thereafter first respondent issued a letter to the applicant to cali for some particulars in which he stated to submit all the particulars of compassionate ground appointment of Deepan Rajesh. As per letter, the applicant submitted all the particulars. Thereafter, the st respondent sent a letter dated 4.8.2007 to the applicant to produce No Objection Letter and also family circumstances letter and to send it to the first respondent. The applicant submit that his elder brother had given no objection certificate dated 8.8.2007 to the i respondent. Thereafter i respondent called the applicant to produce the Legal heirs certificate by its letter dated 8.11.2011 and the applicant had submitted all the certificates to the first respondent. Ail the other legal heirs have given consent and no objection to the applicant to get compassionate ground appointment. There -- is no movable or immovable properties to the applicant. It is further _ submitted that the applicant has no sources of income. He hailed from a very poor. They had depended on the income arrived from his deceased father. After the death, they suffered a lot even for their daily bread. They were unable to mobilize necessary funds to approach the appropriate forum. The applicant submit that on 4.7.2012 the 1 respondent issued a 4 OA 310/00296/2022 impugned order dated 4,7,2012 rejecting the application on the ground "all the applicants for compassionate appointment within the prescribed celling of 5% of the direct recruitment vacancies. It is regretted to inform you that the Circle Relaxation Committee could not recommend your case and thereby rejected the same based on the following grounds 2.
No.-availability of 5% Direct Recruitment Vacancy". The applicant submit that thereafter he approached the 1 respondent in person and addressed his grievances over the livelihood however the same ended in vain. It is submitted that the applicant's elder brother is married and residing separately and is taking care of his family alone without aiding financial support. It is submitted that the applicant is also married looking after this mother, wife, son and grand-mother. The applicant is as of now unemployed and is suffering like anything and unable to look-after the family as well as his son's educational expense and he made mercy t ;
petition to the ia respondent on 19.02.2019. The i° respondent issued reply letter vide REP/31-9/2007 dated 19.02.2019 stating that " However, your case will be placed before the ensuing CRC and examined on merit along with the other cases. The result will be intimated through the Divisional Head concerned." However, till date no results were issued by the St respondent. Now, with a great effort arranged money and filed the instant OA seeking the aforesaid relief.
5 OA 310/00296/2022 3, The respondents have filed reply and submits that the case of 2 the applicant has been placed before the Circle Relaxation Committee but the applicant is less meritorious and therefore his case has not been considered for appointment on compassionate grounds, therefore, the respondents pray for dismissal of the O.A. 4, Heard N. Beula John Selvaraj, Ld. Counsel for applicant and Mr. R.S. Krishnaswamy, Learned Counsel for respondents. Perused the records and relevant documents annexed therewith.
5, The applicant has filed rejoinder and reiterating the contentions made in the OA.
6, On perusal of the docket proceedings, it is seen that on the last occasion ie. on 24.07.2023, Bench directed the respondents to produce the minutes of CRC meeting held in the years 2012, 2015 and 2020 and the matter is posted today accordingly. In compliance of that order, the respondents filed additional type set including the minutes of Circle Relaxation Committee meeting held in the years 2012, 2015 and 2019. Ld. Counsel for the respondents has drawn my attention to the relevant years when the case of the applicant has been considered and is as thus:-
i) It is seen from the CRC meeting held in the year 2012 i.e. on 14.03.2012, 15.03.2012 and 16.03.2012 to consider the cases of compassionate appointment quota .under relaxation of recruitment rules;
wherein, the last selected candidate who is at Sl, No. 94 secured 69 6- OA 310/00296/2022 Relative Merit Points ( RMP) and the name of the applicant is found at in Sl. No, 706 and the applicant secured only 44 RMP.
ii) Further, minutes of the Circle Relaxation Committee held on 28.07.2015 for total vacancies comes to 50 wherein last selected candidate secured 66 RMP whereas in the said CRC, the name of the applicant is found at Sl. No. 825 and the applicant secured 44 RMP (Relative Merit Point).
iii) Further, it is seen from the minutes of the Review Circle Relaxation Committee (CRC), 2019 over the vacancies in the year 2016-2017, the CRC held on 23.12.2019, 16.01.2020, 17.01.2020 and 18.01.2020, the last selected candidates RMP obtained is 70 out of 32 vacancies whereas the applicant secured the RMP of 44.
7. Ld. Counsel for the respondents submits that the case of the applicant was considered in CRC meetings held in three times and the applicant could not get the relevant RMP. By producing a copy of the order passed by this Tribunal in O.A.No.549 of 2021 dated 31.03.2021, Ld. Counsel for the respondents submits that the case of applicant in the instant O.A. similarly situated is that of cited case and, therefore, decision of the cited case is squarely applicable to the instant case also.
8. I have gone through the said order from the operating portion of which is res- judicata "Here, the applicant's father late C.Manoharan died in hamess on 4.6.2001. However, after three years, he submitted an application dated 13.07.2004 for 7 OA 310/00296/2022 Government job on compassionate grounds under 5% ws Direct Recruitment quota. As the case of the applicant was not considered, he approached this | Tribunal in O.A.977 of 2012, This Tribunal, vide | "order dated 2.7.2014 with a direction to the tespondents to consider the case of the applicant for the vacancies of subsequent year (s) and decide on the prayer of the applicant for appointment on compassionate grounds on a comparative assessment oO of the merits of all the eligible claimants and subject to availability of vacancies for appointment on compassionate grounds @ 5% of DR vacancies, By then, in the year 2012, his case was considered by placing his name in the CRC meeting held in the year 2012. Thereafter also in the year 2015 and December 2019 / January 2020 the case of the applicant was placed before the CRC. On all the three occasions, the applicant was not coming to a position to secure the qualifying points under the RMP system. Hence, he could not be appointed under the compassionate 'en appointment scheme under the 5% Direct Recruitment quota."
9. From the perusal of the records and type set produced by the learned counsel for the respondents, it appears that the case of the applicant was considered in the C.R.C. firstly held in the year 2012 , 14,03.2012, 15.03.20212 and 16.03.2012: and secondly held on held in the year 2015 ie. 28.07.2015 and thirdly held in the year 2019 i.e. 23.12.2019, 16.01.2020, 17.01.2020 and 18.01.2020. At all the times the applicant secured less Relative Merit Points than the last selected g- OA 310/00296/2022 candidate as observed above.
10. Taking into account the less RMP obtained by the applicant
- and the decision relied upon by the respondents, I do not find any merits in the OA. The O.A. being devoid of merits is accordingly dismissed. No _ costs.