Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 995 (JHR)

Anil Kumar v. State Of Jharkhand

2002-09-10

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA

body2002
JUDGMENT S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. In this case, the petitioner has prayed for a declaration that he is entitled to hold the post of Typist/Assistant in the Collectorate, having been appointed on compassionate ground on the death of his father, with further prayer to direct the, respondents to give him seniority from the date of his original appointment, made vide letter dated 21st March, 1990. Further declaration has also been sought for that the Officer Order dated 21st September, 1997 is valid and enforceable to the extent in placing the petitioners service in the Collectorate. 2. According to the petitioner, his father was Head Assistant-cum-Accountant in the Collectorate at Lohardagga and died in harness on 3rd March, 1989. The petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground on the post of Typist/Assistant on 21st March, 1990. However, he was deputed in the District Rural Development Agency (D.R.D.A. for short) against a temporary and non-pensionary post. In this background, the petitioner represented before the Deputy Commissioner on 21st August, 1996 for his adjustment to the Collectorate cadre. Thereafter, being successful in interview, petitioners cadre was changed to that of Collectorate Cadre, vide order dated 29th January, 1997 i.e. from the date of his joining in the Collectorate Cadre. The decision aforesaid was approved by the Compassionate Appointment Committee in its meeting, proceeding of which was circulated by the Deputy Commissioner, Lohardagga, vide Memo No. 586 dated 27th June, 1997. Thereafter, such proceeding was confirmed/approved vide letter dated 17th July, 1997. 3. Subsequently, when the petitioner represented on 18th September, 2000 to grant him seniority from the original date of appointment i.e. from 21st March, 1990, the Deputy Commissioner, Lohardagga rejected his prayer by order dated 11th May, 2002 and also sent back the services of the petitioner to D.R.D.A. giving reference of paragraph 9(a) dated 5th October, 1991 (vide Annexure-9) which debarred second appointment on compassionate ground or change in cadre or promotion on such ground. 4. The pleading as made in the writ petition is misconceived being not in/consonance to the annexures attached. It will be evident that the petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground to the post of Clerk (Assistant) in D.R.D.A., Lohardagga, vide Memo No. 199 dated 21st March/1990 issued by the Managing Director, D.R.D.A., Lohardagga. He was hot appointed in the Collectorate. 4. The pleading as made in the writ petition is misconceived being not in/consonance to the annexures attached. It will be evident that the petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground to the post of Clerk (Assistant) in D.R.D.A., Lohardagga, vide Memo No. 199 dated 21st March/1990 issued by the Managing Director, D.R.D.A., Lohardagga. He was hot appointed in the Collectorate. Thus, the petitioners claim that he was appointed in the Collectorate and his service was placed in D.R.D.A. is misconceived. The second appointment seems to have been made in the Collectorate, Lohardagga again on compassionate ground by change of the cadre, vide Memo No. 91 dated 21st January, 1997, though it was not permissible. For the said reason, when it came to the notice of the Deputy Commissioner, Lohardagga, he rectified the mistake made earlier vide order dated 21st January. 1997, sent back the service of the petitioner to D.R.D.A., treating his posting in the Col-lectorate, on deputation, vide order dated 11th May, 2002. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground in the year 1990. Thereafter, there was no occasion to give second appointment on compassionate ground. Once appointment is made on compassionate ground, the question of second time appointment/promotion again on compassionate ground does not arise. This has also been stipulated by the Government, vide Circular No. 13293 dated 5th October, 1991 (Annexure-9). Therein, at paragraph-9, specific direction has been given not to give benefit of compassion after appointment, neither in promotion nor by change of the cadre. 6. The claim of petitioner that he opposed his appointment as Clerk (Assistant) in D.R.D.A. Is incorrect. For the first time, the petitioner represented to adjust him in the Collectorate Cadre six years after his initial appointment, vide representation dated 20th August, 1996 (Annexure-4). 7. Thus, he having taken the advantage of compassionate appointment in 1990, could not have been given the benefit of second appointment and such order issued on 29th January, 1997 being against the law and the guidelines of the State, contained in Circular No. 13293 dated 5th October, 1991 (Annexure-9), I find that the Deputy Commissioner, Lohardagga has rightly cancelled the illegal order, vide order dated 11th May, 2002. 8. There being no merit, the writ petition is dismissed.