Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 652 (PAT)

Mostt. Janki Devi v. State

2003-07-04

CHANDRAMAULI KR.PRASAD

body2003
Judgment 1. This application has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint petitioner no. 2 on compassionate ground. Further prayer made by the petitioners is to quash the order dated 5.7.96 (Annexure 10) whereby petitioner no. 2 has been informed that he is not eligible for appointment on compassionate ground. 2. Shorn of unnecessary details facts giving rise to the application are that husband of petitioner no. 1 and father-in-law of petitioner no. 2, namely, Shyam Bihari Singh was employed as Lineman and was posted at Mahua subdivision of the Bihar State Electricity Board. He died while in service on 23.9.94 leaving behind her widow and two daughters : Indu Devi and Lalita Devi. Petitioner no. 2 happens to be the husband of Lalita Devi. Petitioner no. 1 i.e. widow of the deceased employee, filed an application for grant of appointment on compassionate ground to her son-in-law i.e. petitioner no. 2 on 25.2.95 inter alia stating that after death of her husband his daughter, Lalita Devi and her husband, petitioner no. 2 is looking after her. The prayer of the petitioners was considered by respondent- Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) and by the impugned communication dated 5.7.96 petitioner no. 2 was informed that he being the son-in-law of the deceased employee is not entitled for appointment on compassonate ground. 3. Aggrieved by the same, petitioners preferred this application on 23.1.02 and besides praying for quashing of the aforesaid order dated 5.7.96, mandamus has also been sought for commanding the respondents to appoint petitidner no. 2 on compassionate ground. 4. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents no. 2 and 3 in which Standing order governing appointment on compassionate ground dated 18.2.94 has been placed on record. According to the said standing order, one of the dependent of the deceased employees, namely, husband/wife of the deceased employee, son, unmarried daughter or widow daughter-inlaw can be appointed on compassionate ground. It has further been averred that certified standing order has not contemplated for appointment of the son-in-law on compassionate ground. Accordingly, stand of the respondents in the counter affidavit is that petitioner no. 2 being the son-in-law of the deceased employee is not eligible for appointment on compassionate ground and as such his prayer for appointment on compassioante ground was rightly rejected. 5. Mr. Accordingly, stand of the respondents in the counter affidavit is that petitioner no. 2 being the son-in-law of the deceased employee is not eligible for appointment on compassionate ground and as such his prayer for appointment on compassioante ground was rightly rejected. 5. Mr. Tej Nr. Singh, appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that according to the averments of the widow of the deceased employee petitioner no. 2 as also his wife i.e. her daughter are looking after her and as such petitioner no. 2 ought to have been appointed on compassionate ground. He points out that there is no bar of appointment of son-in-law on compassionate ground. In this connection my attention has been drawn to an order of this court dated 24.8.2001 passed in CWJC No. 10780/2001 (Most. Shail Devo & Ano. V/s. The Board of Director & Ors. [reported in 2001 (4) PLJR 241 ] wherein this court had directed for consideration of the case of son-in-law for appointment on compassionate ground. My attention has been drawn to the following paragraph from the said order "It is obvious from the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that children of the deceased are either not eligible or interested in appointment. In such circumstances, the petition was filed by petitioner no. 1 nominating petitioner no. 2 for appointment on compassionate ground. The said petition has been rejected on the ground that her minor son shall be provided job when he would be major. This does not appear to be a cogent reason for rejecting the claim of petitioner no. 2 because of the fact that in case of death in harness family requires immediate financial relief. In other words, it can be said that respondents are denying immediate relief which is object behind appointment on compassionate ground." 6. Mr. R.K. Dutta, however, appearing on behalf of the respondents, submits that case of the petitioners shall be governed by the standing order in relation to appointment on compassionate ground and that having not provided for appointment of sonin-law on compassionate ground, petitioner no. 2 cannot be appointed on such ground. 7. Having appreciated the rival submissions I do not find any substance in the submission of Mr. Singh Husband of petitioner no. 1 and father-in-law of petitioner no. 2 was an employee of the Bihar State Electricity Board. 2 cannot be appointed on such ground. 7. Having appreciated the rival submissions I do not find any substance in the submission of Mr. Singh Husband of petitioner no. 1 and father-in-law of petitioner no. 2 was an employee of the Bihar State Electricity Board. The Board has issued standing order governing appointment on compassionate ground. It has nowhere provided that son-in-law of the deceased employee can be appointed on compassionate ground in any contigency. It is well settled law that providing appointment on compassionate ground is not constitutional imperative. The employer in order to redress hardship of the family of the deceased employees comes out with decision providing for appointment on compassionate ground. Here in the present case, decision, so taken, has not provided for appointment of son-in-law on compassioante ground in any contigency. 8. Referring to the decision of this court in the case of Most. Shail Devi (supra) the same is clearly distinguishable one. In the said case, according to the decision appointment on compassionate ground was to be provided to the dependant of the deceased employee. Expression dependent was defined to mean, a widow, a son, a daughter, a brother, a sister of the deceased employee or any other close relative nominated by the widow when the deceased employee has left behind no children of his own eligible for appointment and on whom she will be wholly dependent. Interpreting the aforesaid provision, this court found that son-in-law comes within the aforesaid expression and accordingly, directed for consideration of the case of the son-in-law for appointment on compassionate ground. Here, in the present case, as stated earlier appointment of the son-in-law on compassionate ground has not at all been contemplated. In that view of the matter, prayer made by the petitioners for appointment on compassionate ground is not fit to be granted and the authority relied on is clearly distinguishable. 9. There is yet another impediment in the way of the petitioner. Husband of petitioner no. 1 and father-in-law of petitioner no. 2 died on 23.9.94. Application for appointment on compassionate ground was filed on 25.2.95 and the same was rejected on 5.7.96. This writ application has been filed on 23.1.02 i.e., after about six years of the said decision. The object of providing appointment on compassionate ground is to give immediate relief to the family. 1 and father-in-law of petitioner no. 2 died on 23.9.94. Application for appointment on compassionate ground was filed on 25.2.95 and the same was rejected on 5.7.96. This writ application has been filed on 23.1.02 i.e., after about six years of the said decision. The object of providing appointment on compassionate ground is to give immediate relief to the family. Here the petitioners have approached this court after six years of the rejection of their claim and this also disentitles them the relief. 10. In the result, I do not find any merit in this application. It is dismissed accordingly.