Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Ravi Kumar vs Eastern Railway on 17 March, 2023
i OA 90/2015 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH .
KOLKATA 0.4,/350/0090/2019 Date of Order: \/: oe Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Suchitto Kumar Das, Administrative Member in the matter of;
4. Ravi Kumar, son of Late Raj Kumar, aged about 28 years, by occupation-
tnemployed, by faith- Hindu, residing at 28 Noor Mohamad Munshi Lane, PO & PS, [Mstrict- Howrah, Pine 711101.
2 Smt. Sita Devi, widow of Late Raj Kumar, aged about 28 years, by occupation- unemployed, by faith- Hindu, residing at 28 Noor Mohamad Munshi Lane, PO & PS, District- Howrah, Pin-
FLTIOL .
pow dpplicants V5.
1. The Union of India, through the General Manager, Eastern Railway, 17, N. S, Read, Kolkkata-700001.
2. The Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Railway Board, Rail Bhavan, New Delhi- T1o0e.. .
3 The Chief Personnel Officer, Eastern Railway, Howrah-711101,
4. The Divisional Railway Manager, Eastern Railway, Howra'-711101,.
2 DA 90/2019 S. The Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, Bastern Railway, Howrah-711101, 6 The Chief Health Inspector, Bamungachi, Eastern Railway, Howrah- FILi01.
nooo Respondents For The Applicant(s): Sk. S$. H. Mofla, Counsel For The Respondent(s); Mr. S. Chatterjee, Counsel Per! Hon'ble Suchitte Kumar Das, Administrative Member The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 praying for the following relief:
"() Kindly pass necessary order to accept this ariginal application as joint application as both the appiteants have the same praver and object:
(i) An order do issue upon the respondents particular span the Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, Eastern Railway, Howrah fo issue necessary order for the appointment of the applicant en the conmpassionate ground by settin a aside the office arder of the respandents in their Memo No, OCC/Camp/a3 1 Lgsas dated 08.04.2014 and 08.03.2016 and the speaking order vide no. DCC/Comp/33110305/2016¢ Ravi Rumar dated L5.1823018 passed by the same authority. that is Sp Divisional Personnel Officer, Eastern Ballway, Howrah, fi Ag order do issue upon the respondents to praduce entire document before the Tribunal for conscianable af justice,
(iv) And any other arderyorders as your lordsh ips may deer fitatd prapen"
*e # 'This matter is taken up by Single Bench in view of the revised list dated 04.04.2000 issued under Sub-section (6) of Section 5 of the Administrative Y 3 OA 90/2048
3. Heard Learned Counsel for beth sides. Examined pleadings and documents on record, & For the sake of clarity, facts in the case are delineated and discussed hereitrander :
The applicant is the son of one Raj Kumar, ex-Safaiwala under the respondents. Raj Kumar died on 09.01.1995 while still in service. His widow \ made an application for compassionate appointment of the applicant in 1997 when the applicant was still a minor. The widow and the applicant again aptied for appointment on compassionate ground in 20062007, 2010 and 2016. The respondents rejected the application for appointment on compassionate ground vide their letter dated 08.03.2016, stating that the widow and the applicant had concealed the fact that the widow was employed as a Railway servant and had fraudulently declared herself to be a housewife, The applicant and his mother then appealed to the Divisional Railway Manager against the decision conveyed vide respondents' letter dated 08.03.2016, Receiving no reply from the respondents, the applicant approached this Tribunal vide OA No, 350/941/2016. This Tribunal, while taking note of the false declaration made by the widow of the deceased eniployee, directed the respondents to consider her appeal addressed to the DRM /Howrah, In compliance of the Tribunal's order dated 09.07.2018 passed in, OA No, 350/941/2016, respondents passed a speaking order dated 15.11.2018 rejecting the representation of the applicant for appointment on compassionate ground. The applicant has now challenged the decision of the respondents conveyed by their speaking order dated 15.10.2018, ® -
s \ ' Ae also OA 90/2019 In his application, the applicant submits that he cannot be denied appointment on compassionate ground on the ground that her mother was a Railway employee as the policy of the Railways provided for employment on compassionate ground even in cases where both husband and wife were employee in the Railways.
Learned Counsel for the applicant cites a number of cases where appointment on compassionate ground has been given te the dependent of deceased Railway employee even when the spouse of the deceased was also a _ ailway employee. He counters the argument of the respondents that the PAD .
applicant and his mother submitted false declaration regarding the widow's employment status by submitting that the family members of the deceased are Hliterate and unaware of the various requirements for claiming appointment on compassionate ground. They were misled by the dealing clerks and the Inspectors of the respondent organization into submitting false .
declaration. There was no malafide involved on the part of the applicant and he is a victim of ignorance. He should not be penalized for the action af his mother which was also attributable to her ignorance and lack of information. Per contra, respondents in their reply have reiterated the reasons for their decision mentioned in the speaking order. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that it is a proven fact that the widow, while applying for appointment on compassionate ground for her son, concealed the fact that she was eniployed as a Safaiwala in the Railways. She even submitted an affidavit sworn before a Magistrate that she is a housewife. When confronted with the truth, she and her son retracted their earlier declaration and confessed to the authorities in writing that she had submitted a false declaration. Thus, while processing her application for compassionate appointment for her son, OA 90/2019 Vt \ respondents were constrained to apply the instructions of Chief Personnel Officer of Eastern Railways that, application for appointment on compassionate ground cannot be entertained if the applicant is found to have submitted a fake certificate at any stage.
7. Heard both sides. Perused the documents on record. Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment in State Bank of India & Anr, vs. Raj Kumar delivered in 2010 has ruled that, the claim for compassionate appointment is traceable to scheme framed by the employer for such employment and there is no right whatsoever outside such scheme, Appointment on compassionate ground Is not a matter of right. It is given "ea 4 as an extraordinary relief to the family which has lost its breadwinner to tide over the immediate financial crisis. Compassionate ground appointment Is alse to be governed by the specific rides and schemes framed In this regard by the employer.
In the instant case, itis a fact that the widow herself being a permanent employee of the Railways, the family did have a breadwinner at the time when her husband died. Railway rules for granting appointment on compassionate ground specifically states that appointment on compassionate ground will not be considered if the applicant is found to have submitted a fake certificate while applying for appointment on compassionate ground. In the instant case, the widow admittedly made a false declaration under oath, concealing the fact that she was a Railway employee. She has, therefore, attracted the provisions contained in letter dated 27.03.2009 issued by the Chief Personnel OMcer, Rastern Railway.
In view of the above, ft is concluded that the speaking order passed by the respondents is well reasoned and need not be interfered with. BH. In view of the above, OA stands dismissed being devoid of any merit. No casts.
{Suchitte Kumar Das} Administsative Member