Mahinder Dutt Sharma vs U.O.I & Ors on 11 April, 2014
15. We have gone through the decisions relied upon by petitioner‟s
counsel in support of her case. Reliance is placed upon Hon‟ble Supreme
Court‟s decision in Mahinder Dutt Sharma (Supra)wherein the petitioner
having rendered 24 years of service was dismissed on the ground of
incorrigible behaviour and unauthorized absence from duty and had even
failed to participate in the enquiry proceedings and consequentially, his all-
financial benefits were forfeited. The Supreme Court held that it is not
possible to define the term „deserving special consideration‟ and the
circumstances deserving special consideration would ordinarily be
unlimited, keeping in mind the unlimited variability of human
environment. The Supreme Court while allowing the claim of petitioner
held that the claim of petitioner was misdirected as all the authorities on the
administrative side, Tribunal or even the High Court merely examined the
legitimacy of the dismissal order, whereas the basis for determination of
the compassionate allowance should have been whether the petitioner
deserved „special consideration‟ under the provisions of Rule 41 of the
CCS (Pension) Rule, 1972. In the light of aforesaid observations of the
Supreme Court, the objection of respondent that late Naik Krishanpal
W.P.(C) 7067/2019 Page 9 of 16
Singh did not deserve any pensionary benefits does not survive for
consideration.