Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Bhaskar Choudhury vs The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors on 30 June, 2016
Author: I.P. Mukerji
Bench: I.P. Mukerji
1 647 30.06.16
W.P. 19720(W) of 2012 Bhaskar Choudhury Vs. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors. Mr. Shamit Bhanja ... . For the Petitioner. Mr. Alok Kumar Ghosh Mr. Swapan Kumar Debnath .... For the K.M.C. This is the case of the petitioner seeking compassionate appointment with the Kolkata Municipal Corporation. He is the son of Jharna Choudhury who was a stenographer in the License Department of the Corporation. She died on 6th March, 1999. The petitioner's father was also an employee of the Corporation and retired in 2010.
It appears from the document dated 18th July, 2005 (Annexure-P/9 at page 65 of the petition) that the Municipal Commissioner recommended the petitioner's case for compassionate appointment. He considered the S.D. fact that the petitioner's father was an employee of the Corporation. He also considered the circulars and came to the opinion that the income of the family or its economic condition was poor.
2On 19th July, 2005 the then Mayor turned down the recommendation. He said that since the father was working the petitioner was not entitled to appointment. Thus, the records suggest that there was no objection whatsoever of the Corporation to the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate grounds, in place of his mother save and except that his father was working.
This decision of the Mayor was plainly wrong. It was against the applicable circulars being circular 98/1987-1988 read with the subsequent circular 67/1995-1996. In fact the later circular suggests the contrary. The amended Clause-5 is set out in part below:
"In case when both the husband/wife are/were employed in C.M.C. the dependant of such employee may be given appointment in terms of these rules/regulations even if his /her spouse has been in the Corporation employment, subject to fulfillment of the following Criteria for determining the immediate need of financial assistance to the family left by the deceased employee:-
a. The income that would be earned by the deceased employee and the income of the spouse still in employment of the Corporation.
a. The number of dependant in the family and outside it, i.e widowed mother, unmarried sister, minor brother, who may have to be supported by the surviving female spouse is the Corporation's employment. a. Assets left by the deceased employee including P.F. money, death gratuity and family pension in respect of such employee.
a. Similar other factors that may be relevant for deciding the necessity for assistance to the family."
Therefore, the Commissioner was right in going into the economic condition of the family. 3
Mr. Alok Ghosh for the Corporation points out that this writ is delayed. It was filed in 2012.
By delayed filing of the writ, in my opinion, the writ petitioner has to a certain extent damaged his case. But the right to seek compassionate appointment is a continuing cause of action and I will not dismiss the writ on that ground.
The matter is sent back to the Commissioner to consider whether after 2005 there is any change in the economic condition of the family so as to deny employment to the petitioner. Furthermore, he will decide the eligibility of the petitioner now, in terms of age. But the Commissioner cannot reopen the facts found by his predecessor on 18th July, 2005 that the petitioner and his family were poor and needed compassionate appointment. He will only investigate the changed circumstances, if any, on and from that date till today.
The Commissioner will announce his decision upon hearing the petitioner by a reasoned order within eight weeks of communication of this order.
In this case since the earlier decision was made by the Commissioner, the Commissioner cannot delegate this duty to any subordinate officer. 4
The writ application is thus disposed of. Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on priority basis.
( I.P. Mukerji, J.)