Central Administrative Tribunal - Hyderabad
G Chandra Sekhar Rao vs Dept Of Posts on 24 September, 2019
OA. No /O20/01410/2014 IN THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENGH, HYDERABAD OA.No /020/01410/2014 Date of CAV: 29.08.2079. Date of Order 4/09/2019 BETWEEN: 6 Chandra Sekhar Rao, s/o late G Venkatramaian, Aged about 29 yrs, Working as Substitute GDS/MC/MD, Rayannapalem, adv Vijayrai, Eluru Division, District West Godavari. AND 4. Union of inda, rep., by the Director General, Posts, Dept. of Posts, Dak Bhavan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-1. 2. The Chief Postmaster General, A.P Circle, Hyderabad. 3. The Postmaster General, Vjayawada Region Vijayawada, 4. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Ehuru Division, Eluru, District West Godavar. 5 The Inspector, Posts, Elia North Sub-Division,Eluru Divisi on. Fluru-534 004, District West Godavari. or Applicant . Respondents Counsel for the Applicant -Mre.Rachana Kuman, Counsel for the Respondents : Mr.T. Hanumantha Reddy,Sr.PC for CG CORAM The Hon'ble Nirs. Naini Jayaseelan, Administrative Member GCA. No JOZO/0 1410/2014 ORDER:
By Mrs. Naini Jayaseelan, Administrative Member This OA js filed challenging the impugned order dated 30.08.2072 passed by the 4th respondent rejecting the case of the applicant for compassionate appointment on the ground that he had secured fess than 51 points and the impugned order dated 29.10.2014 of the 4th respondent rejecting the case of the applicant on the ground thal fhe Degree cer Hficate produced by the applicant could not be verified due to the shut dawn of the University. This is in spite of the fact that the applicant had also submiltec hig 10th class certificate (SSC), which was the required minimum educational qualification, which the applicant fulfilled at the time of the issue of notification dated 01.11.2014 for the vacancy caused due fo the death of his father, depriving the applicant for appointment under compassionate ground.
2. Brief facts of the case:
Gramin Dak Sevak Mail CarrierfMaill Deliverer (GDS MC/MD), Rayannapaiem afw Vijayrai SO, Eluru Division, died in harness on 19.04.2012 due to Kidney problem Jeaving behind Ais wife Smt.G.Padmavathi, and three sons viz, Sri GAdinarayana, Sr G. Ramakrishna and Sri G.Chandra Sekhara Rao. On the death of his $ ery Rood OA. No./020/01410/2014 father, payment of Death-cum-Reliral Benefits Le, Severance and Ex-gratia Gratuity to the tune of Rs.1,08,000/- (Rs.48 000/- + Rs.B0,000/-
=Rs, 1,08,000/-}) was made to the applicant's mother.
3. The applicant submitted that since his father was suffering due to Kidney failure, the family had to incur huge debts due to borrowing in order fo meet the medical expenses. Therefore, the family had toa repay huge debts from the Death-cum-Retirement benefits resulting in the family being put in indigent condition. The applicants mother had requested the respondent-authorities fo consider the case of the applicant for compassionate appointment.
4. The applicant further submitted that he passed 710th Class (SSC) in 2010 and enrolled himself for Distance Education Course in Bachelor of Arts conducted by the CMJ University, Meghalaya, during the period 2011- 2013 and qualified the same. At the same time, the applicant was asked to submit copies of Certificates of CMJ University. As the academic year just ended and the results declared, the applicant sought 45 days time to abtain ihe B.A. Certificates and submit the same before the Sth respondent. Basing oan the reports of the respondent-authorities, the Circle Relaxation Cammittee (CRC) met on 22.08.2013 and considered the proposals for compassionate engagement of dependents of Gramin Dak Sevaks. The CRC rejected the case for compassionate appointment as the applicant did the Directorate for appointment on compassionate grounds to GDS cadrefpost, and suggested the Superintendent of Post Offices, Khammam/Narasaraopeta/Eluru/Gudivada Divisions to engage provisionally those candidates who cases for engagement as GUS on compassionate grounds is approved by the CRC, within 10 days from the date of receint of the Circle Office letter before 6G. 9.2073, which communication was circulated vide memo dated 29.08.2013 by the office of the 3rd respondent enclosing Annexures in which the name of the applicant figured at Serial No.1. Accordingly, the applicant was engaged as GOS/Mail Carrier/Mail Deliverer, Rayannapaiem SO on Substitute baste pending final decision of the authorities concerned. As such, the applicant was working as GDS/Mail Carrier/Mail Deliverer, Rayannapalem BO. The | applicant assumed that his case would be considered for compassionate appointment on regular basis considering the indigent conditions of the farnily. The 4th respondent, vide memo dated 30.08.2013 rejected the claim of the applicant on the ground that the marks secured by the applicant as awarded by the CRC were less than 51 points. Aggneved by the same, the applicant made discreet enquires and came to know that his educational qualificatians were not taken into account and Re represented to consider the same duly submitting the relevant copies of Certificates of SSC, Degree Certificate and the admission obtained in the MBA course. The request of the applicant was considered and the 4th respondent had called for the relevant records, vide memo dated 30.5.20173, which were submitted fo the Srd respondent.
4. OA.No,/020/01410/2014
5. The applicant further submitted that the respondents deputed an official to verify the marks sheet of the Degree of the applicant in CMJ University, Meghalaya. On approaching the University Officials, if was intimated that due to carmplaints the documenis/records had been seized and the same were under CBI custody and therefore could not produce the relevant information required by the official who was deputed for the purpose. In the meantime, the Meghalaya State Education Department had taken a decision on 31.3.2014 to dissolve the CMJ University, Shillong Meghalaya, resulting in declaring null and void the degrees awarded by the said University. It is submitted by the applicant that this course of action had taken place for the examinations held in 2014 against some complaints and there are no complaints whatsoever of the degrees obtained prior to 2014. However, the official deputed had returned without being able ta verify the marks sheet of the applicant Instead of considering his case, who had passed SSC in the year 2010 and who is eligible to be considered for the post of GDS/MC/MD, the minimum requirement being only 10th Class, his case was once again rejected on the ground that the official deputed could not verify the relevant records af CMJ University, Shillong, and as such the request of the applicant for compassionate appointment could not be considered by the 4th respondent, vide impugned order dated 29.10.2014. Consequently, the Sth respondent issued notification dated 01.11.2014 proposing ta fill up the post in which the applicant is working, which is the place where his father worked and died in harness.
OA No /020/01410/204 4
6. ft is the contention of the applicant that the DG order No.1/-4 PIZOTO-
GDS, dated 17.12.2015, vide Corrigendum order dated 40.08 2078, wherein clarification was issued that the revised provisions would be given affect from the date of issue of the instructions in respect of those cases considered in CRCs held after 17.12.2015, and directing respondent- authorities to consider his case as per the revised Scheme dated 0.052017 and the cases already settled before 17.12.2015 need not strictly be reopened, is iNegal. It is further contended by the applicant that the order dated 17.12.2015 and revised scheme dated 30.05.2017 have te be applied for all the candidates whose parent died while in service. Fixing the cut-off date amounts to discrimination and violation of Articie 14 of the Constitution of india. It is also contended that no calculation sheet of the merit points obtained by the applicant was given by the respondents.
7. The respondents have filed a reply statement. They rejterated that the terms "hard and deserving cases" as per the Directorate's letter dated 14.12.2010, pertain to these cases means over and above 50 merit points and the competent authority ie, Circle Relaxation Committee (CRC) constituted for that purpose found that the applicant has secured only 3c merit points against over and above 51 points prescribed by the Postal Directorate and the coples/documents of Degree Certificate produced by the applicant could not be considered as valid, and taken as flability of the family of the deceased GDS and the relevant merit points cowid not be allocated for the same.
RAY BRAEER ERE wend OA. No /OZ0/0141 0/2014 8 The learned counsel for the Applicant alsa cited an order passed by this Tribunal in O.A.No.369/2018, dated 02.07.2019, in which it was held that fhe Tribunal agrees wilh the respondents that compassionate anpointment cannat be sought as a matier of right. However, the applicant has right to be considered and since the applicant is guestioning the afiotment of mart points, the respond z ants were directed ta re-cansider the case of the applicant for campassionate appointment as per ihe latest guidelines issued an 30.05.2017, and issue a speaking and well reasoned arder within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
9 The learned counsel for the Applicant alsa cited the judgment of of the Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi dated 26.04.2019 in W.PL(C) No.469/2019, wherein it was held as under:
"3 In view of the aforesait settled proposition of law that when an authority is passing an order by faking a decision, it is his duty fo reflect the reason fharein, so that the party against wham, the decision has been faken, af least be able to know fhe reasan othenvise, if the contention af the respondents would be accepted fhat the reason has been shown in the counter affidavit, in that circumsiances, the reason can be known ta the party, if the parties wil approach to the Court, which cannot be said to be permussibie. Further, ihe reason is assigned fo be mentioned in the order, in absence of reason, ii wil be said fo be a machanical decision and hence wilh not be said to be sustainable in ihe eyes of faw."
tx OA No /OZ0/O1 410/20 14 pteededtgy, as Mens, > a -
te, OUR E. po "bienapaesevOP nS } fear u iS mansia iew of the above, the respondents are directed to re-
é g inv
10. case of the applicant as per the extant guideli 8 g Ne PE ~~ nes and issue a speakin ' N iot of € wail reasoned arder within a period of 3 months fram the date of rec a copy of this order.
cd of accordingly. There shall be no or & 3 he OA (5 dispos & Th V4.
costs.
Kane o74 AEA CA ally Srrer.
* | seo e$yesweengs