Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Krishna Kumar Sharma vs Union Of India & Ors on 18 June, 2019
Author: Amrita Sinha
Bench: Amrita Sinha
1
18.06.2019 W.P. 3314 (W) of 2019
C.L.-179(KB)
Krishna Kumar Sharma
Versus
Union of India & Ors.
Mr. Subhasish Sengupta
Ms. Arunima Lala
Mr. Suman Majumder
... For the petitioner.
Mr. Arun Kumar Mishra
... For the Railways.
Ms. Renuka Patrick
... For the U.O.I.
The petitioner is the elder brother of one Mukesh
Sharma who was a constable under the RPF attached with the
Chittaranjan Locomotive Works. The said Mukesh Sharma
died intestate on 22nd September, 2012. The deceased
employee was a bachelor and survived by his father, mother
and the petitioner, being his elder brother.
The mother of the deceased made an application in
favour of her surviving elder son, the petitioner herein, for
being appointed on compassionate ground. The said
application was made on 4th July, 2013.
The application of the mother of the petitioner was
forwarded by the Commanding Officer of the Chittaranjan
Locomotive Works to the Inspector General/RPSF, Railway
2
Board with proposal for appointment of the petitioner on
compassionate ground along with the necessary relevant
documents. The inquiry report of the Welfare Inspector cum
IPF, Head Clerk for the purpose of compassionate appointment
was also enclosed along with the said proposal.
A communication dated 20th August, 2013 was sent from
the office of the Commanding Officer, Chittaranjan to the Chief
Personnel Officer, East Central Railway, Hajipur, Bihar for
consideration of the case of the petitioner for appointment on
compassionate ground in East Central Railway, Hajipur, Bihar
at the earliest. A copy of the said communication was
forwarded to the petitioner with advice to contact the
concerned railway authorities for early consideration of his
case.
The Director/ABE, Railway Board vide a communication
dated 29th July, 2013 requested the Chief Personnel Officer,
East Central Railway for consideration of the case of the
petitioner for being appointed on compassionate ground in
Dhanbad Division of East Central Railway. All the relevant
documents required for consideration of the case of the
petitioner was forwarded along with the said letter. Similar
requests were made in October, 2013, September, 2014 and
November, 2015.
3
The prayer for appointment on compassionate ground
was rejected by a communication dated 30th June, 2016, on
the grounds "as per pass rule, since father of late Mukesh
Sharma Ex Constable/RPSF/CRJ is alive, hence, Sri Krishna
Kumar Sharma can not be treated as dependant on his
younger brother late Mukesh Sharma, Ex
Constable/RPSF/CRJ."
The petitioner relies upon a circular of the Railway
Board being No. E(NG)-II/2014/RC-1/SCR/5 dated 8th July,
2014 wherein the dependants of the family member for the
purpose of appointment on compassionate ground has been
specified.
The said circular mention that dependant family
members for the purpose of appointment on compassionate
ground means "spouse or son (including adopted son),
daughter (including adopted daughter) or brother/sister in
case of unmarried Government servant who is wholly
dependant on the Government servant at the time of death".
According to the petitioner, he is covered by the said
circular as he is the brother of the deceased employee who was
a bachelor at the time of his death. He submits that he is
unemployed and though his father is alive he is not financially
well-off to cater to the needs of the family members. Learned
4
counsel submits that the petitioner was completely dependent
upon his younger brother at the time of his death.
Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondents submits that it is not believable that the elder son
will be dependent upon the younger son. Moreover the father of the deceased employee is still alive. He submits that the petitioner does not qualify the term 'Dependant' and, accordingly, his prayer for compassionate appointment has been rightly rejected.
Upon hearing the submissions made on behalf of both the parties, it appears that in terms of the Railway Board circular the petitioner, being the brother of the deceased employee may be treated as a dependent family member, provided if, the petitioner is able to prove that he was wholly dependent upon his younger brother at the time of his death. The circular does not disqualify the elder brother from being considered as dependant family member.
The marital status of the deceased employee is not disputed.
According to the Railway Board circular what is required to be considered is whether the petitioner was dependent upon the Government servant at the time of his death. 5
From the communication dated 8th February, 2013, it appears that a Welfare Inspector cum IPF was entrusted to enquire into the financial condition of the family of the deceased employee. The Report of the said Welfare Inspector was forwarded along with the proposal for consideration of the application for compassionate appointment.
The letter communicating the rejection of the prayer for compassionate appointment does not reflect that the said Report was considered by the authority. Moreover appointment on compassionate ground is required to be considered in accordance with the circular relating to such appointment and not in accordance with the pass rules as indicated in the impugned order of rejection.
In view of the above, the impugned communication dated 30th June, 2016, is set aside.
The respondent No. 4, being the General Manager (P) of the Zonal Railways is directed to reconsider the prayer of the petitioner for being appointed on compassionate ground strictly in terms of the Railway Board Circular dated 8th July, 2014 and upon taking into consideration the Report prepared by the Welfare Inspector.
The said respondent shall consider the case at the earliest but not later than a period of six weeks from the date 6 of communication of a copy of this order and shall pass a reasoned order and communicate the same to the petitioner within a fortnight thereafter.
It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case and the said respondent will consider the case strictly in terms of the Railway Board's Circular and the Report of the Welfare Inspector.
W.P No. 3314 (W) of 2019 stands disposed of. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be handed over to the parties on compliance of necessary formalities.
(Amrita Sinha, J.)