Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras
D Selma Missier vs Posts on 10 October, 2024
1 OA No. 1014/2023
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHENNAI BENCH
OA/310/01014/2023
Dated this, the 10th day of October Two Thousand Twenty Four
CORAM : HON'BLE MS. VEENA KOTHAVALE, Member (J)
HON'BLE MR. SISIR KUMAR RATHO, Member (A)
D.Selma Missier, D/o Dencil Missier,
Plot No. 4, 3/22, Dinakar Street,
Mudichur Road, Old Perungalathur,
Chennai 600063. .....Applicant
By Advocate M/s. G. Justin
Vs.
The Union of India, rep by,
The Chief Postmaster General,
Tamil Nadu Circle,
Chennai 600002. ....Respondent
By Advocate Mr. R. S. Krishnaswamy
2 OA No. 1014/2023
ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. Sisir Kumar Ratho, Member(A)) This OA has been filed by the applicant seeking the following relief:-
"to call for all the records pertaining to the order dated 04-09-2023 in proceeding no.REP/31- OA362/2023 on the file of the respondent and set aside the same by awarding 10 marks under head Property and consequently direct the respondent to issue appointment order to the applicant on the compassionate ground in any group 'C' post and thus render Justice."
2. The facts of the case as submitted by the Applicant, in brief, are as follows:-
2.1. The Applicant states that her mother M. Lurdhu Sahaya Stella, worked under the respondent as Sorting Assistant Airmail Sorting Division, Chennai. During departmental training at Madurai on 07.03.2017 at around 8:30 pm, the applicant's mother felt uneasy in the hostel room (PTC Madurai) and later around 11:15 pm suffered severe breathing problem and chest pain. The applicant's mother died on the way to hospital on 08.03.2017 due to cardiac arrest.
2.2. The applicant states that her mother is only breadwinner of her family and no other income from any other source to the applicant's family. Hence, the applicant made a representation to the respondent on 09.05.2017 seeking for compassionate appointment.3 OA No. 1014/2023
2.3. The Applicant states that the family of the applicant is in indigent circumstances and hence the Tahsildar had issued consolidated a certificate for getting a job on compassionate grounds on 23.10.2017. The applicant states that her family is not able to pull on their day to day life, as not having any movable or immovable property and no source of income. Hence, the applicant requested the respondent to appoint her on the compassionate ground.
2.4. The reply given by the respondent vide order dated 03.05.2018 was challenged by the applicant in O. A. No. 305 of 2019 before the Tribunal.
The said O.A. was dismissed on 12.03.2019, only on the ground that it is pre-mature. Thereafter, she made a representation on 13-07-2021 for appointment on compassionate ground as a special case, but the respondent did not pass any orders on the representation dated 13.07.2021. Hence the applicant filed O.A. No. 101 of 2022 before this Tribunal. This Tribunal passed an order, directing the respondent to consider the representation dated 13.07.2021 and pass reasoned speaking order as per law within a period of three months.
2.5. The respondent, by reply dated 30.05.2022 stated that the applicant's case was considered by the Circle Relaxation Committee for the year 2017- 2018, but not recommended for appointment and rejected the applicant's 4 OA No. 1014/2023 claim because of the comparatively lower merit than Relative Merit Point (R.M.P).
2.6. After receiving the order dated 30.05.2022, the applicant thereafter filed representation to reconsider the said order for giving additional mark for immovable property (House) since the immovable property is situated at Porombokku land hence it has no value and the statement of father that it is worth Rs. 5 lakhs is not correct and awarding 3 marks is against the letter No. 37-36/2004-SPB-1/C dated 20.01.2010. Her representation was rejected by the order dated 16.08.2022 and that was challenged by the applicant in O.A. No. 362 of 2023 before this Tribunal and this Tribunal disposed of the said OA at the admission stage with liberty to the applicant to file a fresh, comprehensive representation and a direction to the competent authority to consider the same and pass a reasoned and speaking order. 2.7. The respondent once again considered applicant's case as directed by this Tribunal and rejected the claim vide order dated 04-09-2023 holding that what was considered earlier was correct and the mark awarded for house property is also correct and cannot be revised. Aggrieved, the applicant has filed this OA.
3.1. The respondents have filed their reply opposing the relief prayed by the applicant. It is submitted that while undergoing the training at Postal Training Centre, Madurai, the applicant's mother Late Lurdhu Sahaya Stella, 5 OA No. 1014/2023 Ex-Sorting Assistant died on 08.03.2017 due to cardiac arrest. The applicant submitted representation dated 09.05.2017 seeking compassionate appointment. In this connection, a field officer was nominated for the collection of synopsis along with the relevant documents. 3.2. The documents submitted by the applicant were forwarded to the Respondent's Office vide Senior Superintendent RMS, Airmail Sorting Division, Chennai 600016, office letter no. B-110/CA/DSM/2017 dated 30.01.2018. Her proposal was received on 31.01.2018. The applicant's case was processed immediately and awarded with Relative Merit Points (RMP) of 41, as prescribed by Directorate in letter No.37- 36/2004-SPB-I/C dated20.1.2010 - Compassionate Appointment Scheme Relative Merit Points system and procedure for selection.
3.3. The Circle Relaxation Committee (CRC) held in 2019 for the year of vacancy 2017-18 for considering the applications received from 01.04.2017 to 31.03.2018 considered the applications from various applicants including the applicant in pursuance of the instructions issued vide Directorate letter No. 37-4/2013-SPB-I/C dated 13.01.2016.
3.4. It is submitted that the educational qualification of the applicant is XII, B.Com and therefore, the Circle Relaxation Committee (CRC) examined her case for the vacancies in the cadres viz., Postal Assistant / Sorting Assistant, Postman / Mail Guard and Multi Tasking Staff; but not 6 OA No. 1014/2023 recommended as her RMP totaling 41 was comparatively less than the recommended candidates and for want of vacancies in RRR quota. RMP earned by the last recommended candidates in the said CRC is furnished below:
CRC- RMP of last RMP of last RMP of last
Year of recommended recommended recommended
vacancy candidate in r/o candidate in r/o candidate in r/o
PA/SA PM/MG MTS
2017-18 54 52 45
As the committee did not recommend the case and further, recommended the case for rejection, the result of CRC was communicated to the Divisional Head to inform the applicant, vide Respondent letter No.REP/47-3/2021 dated 16.11.2021. The competent authority directed to intimate that the application for compassionate appointment will be treated as "closed" and will not be reopened again, in accordance with the recommendations of the Circle Relaxation Committee. Accordingly, the same was intimated to the applicant vide SSRM, Airmail Sorting Division letter No.B110/CA- DSM/2017 dated 29.11.2021 2021.
3.5. The claim of the applicant that as her mother had died during training, the Respondent has to treat her case as special case and give appointment on compassionate ground could not be acceded to, as the objective of the Scheme is to grant appointment on compassionate grounds to a dependent 7 OA No. 1014/2023 family member of a Government servant dying in harness while in service, irrespective of cause of death. Therefore, her case was to be considered along with the other cases where Government servants died in harness. 3.6. The Postal Directorate, vide letter no. 37-36/2004-SPB-I/C dated 20.01.2010, ordered to decide the cases of compassionate appointments by allocating points based on various attributes such as financial condition of the family like assets, liabilities, size of the family, essential needs of the family like education of children etc, so as to achieve the objective of the scheme of Compassionate Appointment and to ensure complete transparency and uniformity in the selection process. The claim of the applicant was examined in the light of instructions of Directorate in letter no.37-36/2004- SPB-I/C dated 20.1.2010 by applying relative merit points for various attributes, such as family pension, terminal benefits, monthly income of earning members, movable and immovable property, no. of dependents, no. of unmarried daughters, no. of minor children and left- over service, etc. 3.7. The applicant submitted representation dated 09.05.2017 seeking compassionate appointment. She also submitted combined certificate dated 23.10.2017 issued by Tahsildar, Tambaram for getting job on Compassionate grounds, wherein it was stated that Ms. D. Selma Missier, D/o. Densil Missier residing at No. 4, 3/22 Dinakar Street, Mudichur Road, Old Perungalathur, Chennai - 600063 and 8 OA No. 1014/2023 i. There is no moveable/ immovable property in her name; ii. She has no source of income and the source of income to her family is the pension of the deceased person Tmt. M. Lurdhu Sahaya Stella. 3.8. The immovable / movable properties held in the name of all the family members are required to be taken into account to assess the indigent condition of the family. But in the above said certificate issued on 23.10.2017, it was only mentioned that the applicant has no property in her name. As the certificate was silent about the properties held by the other family members, it was instructed by the Chief Postmaster General, Tamilnadu Circle, Chennai, vide letter No. REP/31-02/2017-18 dated 28.12.2017 to obtain certificate containing value of property owned by the family to award marks for Movable/Immovable property. 3.9. Hence, the SSRM, Airmail Sorting Division directed the applicant to obtain the value of the property owned by the family from the concerned Revenue Authorities. Accordingly, the applicant submitted a copy of certificate received from the revenue authorities containing the following particulars which had been issued during the year 2005:
i. The patta cannot be changed to the name of the buyer (i.e., M. Lurdhu Shaya Stella);9 OA No. 1014/2023
ii. Land belongs to Tamilnadu Government & coming under Urban Land Ceiling Limit (ULC).
3.10. As per compassionate appointment scheme, appointments can be made to the deserving applicants for maximum of 5% of the Direct Recruitment vacancies available for the year. The applicant secured 41 Relative Merit Points (RMPs). Out of cases which were placed before CRC for the vacancy year 2017-18, the committee did not recommend the cases of many applicants for offer of appointment including that of the applicant, as the Relative Merit Point (RMP) i.e., 41 points, secured by the applicant was comparatively less than the RMP of recommended candidates and non-
availability of Direct Recruitment (DR) vacancy in the respective cadre under RRR quota. Based on the instructions issued vide Dte letter No.37- 4/2013-SPB- I/C dated 13.01.2016, it was intimated that the case was closed and would not be considered again.
3.11. The applicant herself had submitted declaration at the time of submission of application for compassionate appointment wherein she had declared that the value of immovable property i.e., Building value of the house was Rs.5,00,000/-. The value of the land to the extent of 2400 sq. feet was not reported by the Applicant at the time of submission of application and as such, it was not included in the property value while awarding the RMPs. Therefore, RMP of 3 was awarded for that category as per 10 OA No. 1014/2023 Directorate letter No. 37-36/2004-SPB- I dated 20.01.2010 based on the value of the building (House) declared by the applicant. 3.12. The applicant had declared that she had no source of income. But, it is ascertained that the applicant, has been working in the leading MNCs from the year 2014 for past 9 years (even at the time of death of her deceased mother) and now working in the position as Team Lead-IT from January 2023. For the income of the family, appropriate points were to be deducted. But by submitting the false information that nobody in the family is working anywhere, she claimed the full points for earning members criteria. The respondents submit that thus the applicant has submitted false information before this Court.
3.13. The weightage given to various attributes for arriving RMPS have been modified on review and there is no provision to award the points as claimed by the applicant in accordance with the RMPS which is not in vogue presently. Further, it is respectfully submitted that all the vacancies pertaining to the year 2017-18 were filled up and therefore, the relief / interim relief of the applicant to award 10 marks under the head Property and reserve one vacancy is not maintainable.
3.14. The case of the applicant was dealt in accordance with the extant Rules and instructions on the subject matter and non-consideration of the 11 OA No. 1014/2023 applicant for compassionate appointment is fully justified. Accordingly, the respondents pray for dismissal of the OA as devoid of merits.
4. The applicant has filed rejoinder and reiterated the contentions made in the OA and prayed for grant of relief.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record.
6. The crux of the issue in this case is regarding award of Relative Merit Points (RMP) by the Circle Relaxation Committee to the applicant. The award of RMP is covered by the guidelines issued by the Department of Posts vide their letter No. 37-36/2024-SPB-1/C, dt. 20.01.2010. The relevant portion of the guidelines which is primarily meant for assessing the indigent condition of the family is reproduced below :-
"The efficacy of the Scheme is based on its transparency. It is this aspect, which is foremost and hence while considering a request for appointment on Compassionate grounds by a Committee, a balanced and objective assessment of the financial condition of the family has to be made taking into consideration its assets and liabilities and all other relevant factors such as the presence of earning member, size of the family, ages of the children and the essential needs of the family etc. This is done to assess the degree of indigence among all the applicants considered for compassionate appointment within the prescribed ceiling of 5% of the direct recruitment vacancies."
As per these guidelines, the Circle Relaxation Committee is required to follow the valuation of the assets and liabilities and is not expected to go into details of the legality / saleability / mortgageability of the assets. The exercise is primarily to assess the degree of indigence of the family. 12 OA No. 1014/2023
7. Therefore, the CRC has rightly assessed the valuation of the property of the applicant as Rs. 5 lakhs, which is same as per her declaration submitted for compassionate appointment. Hence, there is no discrepancy in the award of marks to the applicant.
8. In view of the aforesaid reasons, there is no merit in the case.
9. Accordingly, the OA is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(Sisir Kumar Ratho) (Veena Kothavale)
Member (A) Member (J)
10.10.2024
SKSI