Shailesh Kumar vs NORTH CENTRAL RAILWAY on 29 October 2026

1. Union of India, through its General Manager, Northern Central Railway, Allahabad.

2. Divisional Railway Manager, Northern & Central Railway, Allahabad. …..Respondents By Advocate: Shri Rajendra Singh

ORDER (ORAL) Per Hon’ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative In this case relating to compassionate appointment, the applicant has sought following reliefs:-

1. To quash the impugned order dated 23.02.2025 passed by the opposite party no. 2 with all consequential benefits.

2. To direct the opposite parties the applicant application may take a fresh decision as he is eligible to serve the railway department.

3. To any other relief which the Hon’ble Tribunal may consider appointment may be granted in favour of the applicant.

4. Cost of application be awarded to the applicant.

2. The facts of the case are that the applicant’s unmarried brother, Bhimesh Kumar, who was working on the post of Track Maintainer-IV under the respondents, died in harness on 05.12.2024 leaving behind his father and mother and four siblings, including the applicant. The applicant’s application for appointment on compassionate grounds was rejected by the respondents vide order dated 25.03.2025 on the ground that the deceased employee had not declared that the applicant was dependent on him and also that the applicant was not covered within the definition of family. Aggrieved, the applicant has preferred this OA.

3. The applicant states that there are six members in the family of the deceased employee – his father and mother, one married brother, one married sister, one unmarried sister and the applicant (unmarried brother); that they live in a house of the size 15 feet by 20 feet; that the applicant’s father has 6 Biswa agricultural land; that there is no other moveable or immovable property owned by the family; that the family’s income is Rs. 14,000 per month; and that the family is suffering from financial crisis. He contends that in terms of respondents’ instructions dated 03.02.1981, appointment on compassionate grounds can be extended to a near relative or blood relative and that under the scheme for appointment on compassionate grounds brought out by the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT), dependent family members mean ‘brother or sister in case of unmarried government servant’.

4. The respondents contend that in the service records of the deceased employee, no family member had been declared as dependent. Further, on the basis of an enquiry conducted by the Welfare Inspector, it was concluded that the applicant had failed to establish dependency on the deceased employee. Accordingly, his case was not found eligible for consideration keeping in view the provisions of RBE No. 70/2014 dated 08.07.2014.

5. Heard both the parties. 6.1 It is noted that the Master Circular No. 16 titled ‘Appointment on Compassionate Grounds’ has the following provision of relevance to the case at hand: “III. Persons eligible to be appointed on compassionate grounds

Son/ daughter/ widow/ widower of the employees are eligible to be appointed on compassionate grounds in the circumstances in which such appointments are permissible. Where the widow cannot take up employment and the sons/daughters are minor, the case may be kept pending till the first son/daughter becomes a major i.e. attains the age of 18 years, subject to time limits as provided under Para (V) of the Circular. The benefit of compassionate appointments may also be extended to a "near relative/adopted son/daughter". The eligibility of a near relative/adopted son/daughter to such appointments will be subject to the following conditions:

a. Near Relative: … A blood relation who is considered to be a bread-winner of the family can be considered as "near relative" for the purpose of appointment on compassionate grounds.” (emphasis supplied) It is evident from the above that the brother of the deceased employee, who is a blood relation, can be considered for appointment on compassionate grounds if he is considered to be the bread-winner of the family. 6.2 It is also noted that RBE No. 70/2014 dated 08.07.2014 contains the following provision of relevance in the present controversy: “Existence of a number of instructions as well as the issue of specific clause of dependency on the ex-Railway employee have been engaging the attention of this office for sometime. Accordingly, the matter has been reviewed by the Board and it has been decided that it should be left to the discretion of the family concerned in case of death of ex-employee to request for a job to either spouse or any child {whether son or daughter (unmarried/married/divorced/widowed)} subject to the condition that the concerned child will be the bread-winner of the family concerned. Further, for this purpose instructions issued by this Ministry vide letter issued under RBE No. 22/2014 dated 04.03.2014 be read in the same spirit. However, the dependent of an unmarried male/unmarried female Railway employee dying in harness/retiring on medical grounds, may be considered for compassionate appointment by the Railway at its own level, subject to the condition that the candidate proposed for appointment is shown as dependent on the ex- employee on the basis of documents such as inclusion/declaration of names in the pass or in Ration cards etc. The condition of inclusion in the pass declaration or Ration cards etc. is only a facilitating factor, and not intended to be a restrictive one. In the absence of any such documentary proof, the factual position regarding the extent of the dependency may be got verified by deputing a Welfare Inspector to inquire into the circumstances. The relaxation of time limit permissible in case of minor children of those employees who die in harness would also apply in the case of dependents of those who die as bachelor/spinster.”

(emphasis supplied) It is evident from the above that the dependent of unmarried Railway employee is eligible for consideration for appointment on compassionate grounds. Further, the documentary proof of dependent status of person seeking appointment on compassionate grounds in case of the Railway employee who was unmarried at the time of his death in harness based on inclusion of such person in the pass or ration card is only facilitative and not restrictive; and in the absence of such documentary proof, the extent of dependency may be verified through the Welfare Inspector. 6.3 It follows from the provisions of Master Circular No. 16 as well as RBE No. 70/2014 quoted above that the applicant could not have been considered ineligible for appointment on compassionate grounds for not being covered in the definition of family of the deceased employee. 6.4 Coming to the aspect of dependent status, in terms of RBE No. 70/2014, the documentary proof of dependent status of person seeking appointment on compassionate grounds is only facilitative and not restrictive and in the absence of such documentary proof, the extent of dependency may be verified through the Welfare Inspector. 6.5 Perusal of the report dated 30.12.2024 of the Welfare Inspector reveals that the Welfare Inspector visited the house of the deceased employee and verified that six family members were living there and that the deceased employee did not leave behind any movable or immovable property. However, it is noted that the report did not record any finding on the dependent status of the applicant; though the report mentions that the applicant’s father has income of Rs. 15,000 per month, it does not throw light on the financial condition of the family, including the means of livelihood of the brothers and sisters living there.

6.6 In conclusion, it cannot be said that the Welfare Inspector’s report dated 30.12.2024 provides a sound basis for reaching the decision that the applicant has failed to establish his dependency on the deceased employee. 7.1 In view of the foregoing, the order dated 23.03.2025 is quashed and set aside. 7.2 The respondents are directed to conduct further enquiry through the Welfare Inspector on the dependent status of the applicant, and based on such further enquiry reconsider the applicant’s claim for appointment on compassionate grounds and decide the same by way of a reasoned and speaking order to be communicated to the applicant, preferably within three months of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7.3 This OA is disposed of in above terms. 7.4 Associated MAs also stand disposed of. 7.5 Parties shall bear their own costs.

(Pankaj Kumar) Member (A)

Warij Warij Yadav Digitally signed by Warij Yadav