Sanjay Kumar vs D/o Forests Ut Of Jammu & Kashmir on 31 December 2024

ORDER

Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member

1. The SWP/WP(C) No. 3599/2019 was transferred from the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu and was registered as T.A. No. 61/1668/2020 by the Registry of this Tribunal.

2. The present matter was filed before the Hon’ble High Court with following prayer: a) “ Writ of Mandamus: - “Commanding upon the respondents to consider and appoint the petitioner for compassionate appointment under SRO-43 of 1994 on account of death of his father who died while in active service, within some time frame. Further the relaxation in qualification/age is required be also granted to the petitioner under SRO 43 of 1994.

:: 3 ::

b) Commanding upon the respondents be burdened with exemplary costs for having delaying appointment to the petitioner and for the hardship and harassment faced by the petitioner on account of the acts of omission and commission on the part of the respondents. c) Any other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and the circumstances of the case.”

3. The facts of the case as averred by the applicant in his pleadings, are as follows: - a) The father of the petitioner namely Late Sh. Radha Krishan was working as Helper in Forests Department under the control of respondent no.5. The deceased father of the petitioner died on 02-01-2014 while he was in active service with the respondents. b) The petitioner accordingly applied before the respondent No.5 and finally the case was recommended in coordination to the respondent No. 1 for issuance of compassionate appointment in favour of the petitioner. The respondent No.1 by virtue of the communications to the other official respondents have

:: 4 ::

communicated to identify the posts of Class- IV for purpose of appointing the petitioner on compassionate appointment and in lieu of the communications, the respondent No.5 in coordination communicated to the respondent No.3 by virtue of communication dated 20-02-2018 the number of vacancies vacant in the Division Marwah. c) The respondents have already fulfilled all the formalities with regard to his compassionate appointment and only the formal appointment order was required to be issued by the respondents to the petitioner, but instead of issuing appointment letters the respondent no.1 again started making queries with regard to the fresh dependent certificates and other relevant documents to be submitted to the respondent No.1 for proceeding ahead with regard to the compassionate appointment of the petitioner and the petitioner even though despite providing already the requisite formalities have once

:: 5 ::

again supplied all the documents and other formalities to the official respondents but till today no concrete decision has been taken by the official respondents. d) The petitioner has approached the respondents time and again right from the date of the death of the father of the petitioner for considering the case of the petitioner on compassionate appointment but the department has done nothing with regard to the issuance of the compassionate appointment in favour of the petitioner which constrained the petitioner after availing all the remedies available with the respondents approached before this Hon'ble Court.

4. The respondents have filed their written statement wherein they have averred as follows: - a) It is submitted that the case of said applicant namely Sh. Sanjay Kumar was submitted with all required documents by Marwah Forest Division vide no. 406-07/MFD dt.04.06.2014 to higher

:: 6 ::

authorities for considering the case under compassionate appointment. Respondents have timely furnished all the information sought by higher authorities in the instant matter at various point of time. b) As per SRO-120 of 2018, Deputy Commissioner concerned is the competent authority to furnish the required certificates. Respondent No. 5 i.e., Divisional Forest Officer, Marwah Forest Division Kishtwar, vide No.580-81/MFD Dated 12.05.2021, requested for furnishing the required certificate. But information in this regard has not been received. Divisional Forest Officer, Marwah Forest Division Kishtwar has again requested vide No. MFD/SRO-43/2024-25/1105-06 dated 22.07.2024 to furnish the required certificate at the earliest. dt. 23.04.2021. c) Due to jurisdictional confusion between Kishtwar Forest Division and Marwah Forest Division, the transfer application of applicant was not made available to the office of Marwah

:: 7 ::

Forest Division and therefore respondent No. 5 had no information regarding this present application which was pending adjudication in Hon'ble CAT Jammu. Respondent No. 5 were informed about this application only after order passed dated 15.07. 2024.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings made by them.

6. In the present case, the petitioner is seeking compassionate appointment under SRO-43 of 1994 on account of death of his father who died while in active service, within some time frame. Further, the relaxation in qualification/age is required be also granted to the petitioner under SRO 43 of 1994.

7. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per SRO 120 of 2018 the cases which are pending/rejected cases with regard to the compassionate appointment shall be considered under the said rules by the General Administration Department after

:: 8 ::

countersigned by the Administrative Secretary. So, the official respondents now are under an obligation to consider the case of the petitioner under the said SRO by referring the case to the GAD for compassionate appointment of the petitioner.

8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents argued that due to jurisdictional confusion between Kishtwar Forest Division and Marwah Forest Division, the transfer application of applicant was not made available to the office of Marwah Forest Division and therefore respondent No. 5 had no information regarding this present application which was pending adjudication in Hon'ble CAT Jammu. Respondent No. 5 were informed about this application only after order passed dated 15.07. 2024.

9. In the case in hand, the SRO-43 of 1994 provides a clear mechanism for the appointment of family members of deceased employees who die while in active service. The purpose of this provision is to offer financial security to the family of the deceased employee by

:: 9 ::

facilitating their employment, in cases where they are otherwise unable to meet the regular qualification/age requirements due to exceptional circumstances such as the sudden death of the breadwinner.

10. The petitioner, as the son of the deceased employee, meets the eligibility criteria for compassionate appointment under SRO-43 of 1994. It is established law that the provisions of the SRO should be interpreted in a manner that upholds the spirit of compassionate consideration for the family of the deceased, particularly where such family members are unable to meet the strict qualification or age requirements due to the sudden and unfortunate circumstances of the death.

11. In the case of State of Himachal Pradesh v. Shashi Kumar, (2004) 4 SCC 320, it is held that – “compassionate appointments should be made in accordance with the provisions and schemes framed by the government, with the aim of providing immediate relief to the family

:: 10 ::

of a deceased employee. The Court emphasized the need for expeditious processing of compassionate appointment requests.”

12. In the case of State of Haryana v. Rattan Singh, (2015) 4 SCC 122, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the compassionate appointment scheme must be interpreted in a manner that is not overly rigid but considers the underlying purpose of the scheme – to provide support to the family of a deceased employee. It is the duty of the authorities to ensure that eligible family members are granted relief without undue delay.

13. The Court is of the view that the petitioner’s claim is well-founded. However, the delay in the process appears to be due to administrative and jurisdictional issues between the concerned authorities. While the respondents have made efforts to obtain the necessary certificate from the Deputy Commissioner, the delay in receiving the required information has resulted in the postponement of the petitioner’s compassionate appointment. The Court acknowledges the respondents' point regarding jurisdictional confusion between the

:: 11 ::

Kishtwar Forest Division and Marwah Forest Division. Nonetheless, it is incumbent upon the respondents to expedite the process and ensure that the petitioner’s claim is processed without further delay.

14. In view of the above, the petition is allowed with the following directions:

(i) The respondents are hereby directed to appoint the petitioner for compassionate appointment under SRO-43 of 1994, in view of the death of his father while in active service, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

(ii) The respondents are further directed to grant relaxation in the qualification and age requirements, as stipulated under SRO-43 of 1994, to enable the petitioner to be considered for the said compassionate appointment.

(iii) The respondents are directed to resolve the issue of the necessary certificate expeditiously and ensure that all pending formalities are

:: 12 ::

completed within four weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy the order, in order to facilitate the appointment of the petitioner.

15. Keeping the above facts in view, the TA has merit and deserves to be allowed.

16. Accordingly, the TA is allowed.

17. However, there shall be no orders so as to costs.

(RAM MOHAN JOHRI) (RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA) Administrative Member

Judicial Member

/harshit/