Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 1085 (PAT)

Bir Bahadur Ram v. State of Bihar Through Secretary Department

2018-07-13

JYOTI SARAN

body2018
JUDGMENT : Jyoti Saran, J. Heard the parties. 2. The petitioner prays for compassionate appointment on account of death of his mother on 21.06.2014 who was serving as Khalasi with the respondent Bihar State Hydrolic Power Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation'). 3. While at paragraph 9 of the writ petition the petitioner has specifically stated that on the death of his mother, the family has received retiral benefits and they are also getting family pension, the claim for compassionate appointment has been contested by 'the Corporation' on grounds that the petitioner's mother was an ad-hoc employee. Such is the statement made in paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit. 4. While accepting the position regarding payment of retiral dues at paragraph 10 of the counter affidavit, an objection is raised at paragraph 11 that since the service of the mother of the petitioner has not been regularized hence the petitioner is not entitled to compassionate appointment. 5. While it cannot be contested that it is only a regular employee of any establishment be it, under the State or the Corporation, who is entitled to retiral benefits, the respondent 'Corporation' does admit at paragraph 10 that the retiral dues relating to the mother of the petitioner have been paid and that nothing is due for payment. This admission itself confirms that the mother of the petitioner was holding a regular post otherwise the family would not be entitled to the terminal benefits. 6. In such circumstances, where the payment of retiral dues admissible to the family of the deceased has not been disputed by 'the Corporation', that her death happened in harness, a claim for compassionate appointment would become a part of such benefits. 7. The statement made on behalf of 'the Corporation' at paragraphs 10 and 11 are self contradictory and the matter requires a fresh consideration at the level of the Managing Director, respondent No.2, who should consider the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment and dispose of the same in accordance with law bearing in mind the observation of this Court made hereinabove. Let the disposal take place within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this judgment. 8. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.