Dismissed

Rakesh Kumar v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Delhi HC5 Sept 2011W.P.(C)/6493/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge Bench dismissed a writ petition seeking compassionate appointment for the petitioner. The Court upheld the Tribunal's rejection, finding that the petitioner's family had assets exceeding limits and grown-up earning members, thus failing to meet the criteria for compassionate appointment.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed without order as to costs.

Rakesh Kumar Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2011)

¶1

*** IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +** Writ Petition (Civil) No.6493/2011

¶2

% Date of Decision: September 5, 2011

¶3

RAKESH KUMAR ....Petitioner Through Mr. Shyam Babu and Mr. Shekhar Kumar, Advocates.

¶4

VERSUS

¶5

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & OTHERS…..Respondents Through Ms. Ferida Satarwala, Advocate for R-1-3.

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA O R D E R

¶8

% SANJIV KHANNA, J.

¶9

Rakesh Kumar has filed the present writ petition seeking

¶10

compassionate appointment and has inter alia prayed for quashing of the order dated 25^th January, 2011 by which O.A.No.2295/2008 has been

¶11

dismissed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi (for short, the tribunal).

¶12

We have heard Mr. Shyam Babu, Advocate, but do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order.

¶13

The petitioner’s father had expired on 23^rd June, 2000 leaving behind widow, two married daughters, and two sons including the

¶14

WP(C) 6493/2011 Page 1 of 3

¶15

petitioner. Elder brother of the petitioner is working, though it is claimed that he is living separately and not supporting the family.

¶16

On the question of financial position of the petitioner’s family, the

¶17

tribunal has referred to the findings of the Screening Committee, which had examined relative financial condition of the applicants to ascertain and select the most deserving cases i.e. cases of applicants, who because of financial penury and other relevant circumstances deserve appointment. The findings recorded by the Screening Committee, as noticed in the

¶18

order of the tribunal, are as under:-

¶19

“It is also stated that on receipt of her application, keeping in view the instructions/guidelines framed on the subject, enquiries were got conducted through the local police, and as per the report of the local police, the applicant owned a house measuring 100 yards worth Rs.2 lacs, 4 Bigha 1 ½ Bishwa agriculture land worth Rs.9 lacs and had received pensionary benefit of Rs.3,07,281/-, aggregating to Rs.14,07,281/-. Besides, the applicant gets a monthly family pension of Rs.1862/- + DA as per rules and is also earning Rs.7200/- annually from the agricultural land as per local police report and further, the sons - Shri Rakesh Kumar (18 years age) and elder brother Jasbir Singh (23 years age) - are grown up and are capable of earning their livelihood, and that there is no liability in the form of minor children or a young daughter who is to be brought up and to be married.”

¶20

We do not agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that the

¶21

aforesaid valuation of the properties recorded should be ignored as before

¶22

WP(C) 6493/2011 Page 2 of 3

¶23

valuating the properties, hearing should have been granted to the petitioner. There is no such requirement. In case there was any error or mistake in valuation, it could have been pointed out and explained before the tribunal. Existence/ownership of the properties is not disputed. There is 5% ceiling for appointment on compassionate grounds and this factor

¶24

and number of vacancies available have been kept in mind by the Screening Committee. The extent of financial distress/acuteness and dire need, have been given due regard for selecting the deserving candidates.

¶25

It is now well settled that compassionate appointment is not a source of recruitment and is exercised rarely in suitable cases to enable a family to tie over sudden crises due to death of an earning member. It is to relieve the family of the deceased from financial destitution due to the untimely death. In view of the facts noticed above, the aforesaid requirements are not satisfied.

¶26

We do not find any merit in the present writ petition and the same is dismissed without any order as to costs.

¶27

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

¶28

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶29

SEPTEMBER 05, 2011 NA

¶30

WP(C) 6493/2011

¶31

3 of 3

Rakesh Kumar v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D Jayachandra Naidu Vs UOI and Ors.

Classic Papers Converters P.Lt Vs Commissioner of Income Tax I D

Ashok Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs Harpal Singh

UOI Vs Gurdial Singh

Jagdish Prasad Gupta Vs MCD

Paramjeet Chopra Vs M.C.D.

Arvind Gupta D.A.V. Centenary Public School Vs Maheshwari & Anr.

Suresh Kumar Vs Gnct of Delhi and Ors.

Classic Papers Converters P.Lt Vs Commissioner of Income Tax I D

Tanvi Yadav Vs University of Delhi & Ors.

Classic Papers Conveters P.Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income Tax I Delhi

UOI and Anr. Vs Ms Tewari and Ors.

Ved M.Rao Vs Secretary , Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and Ors.

Naresh Chandra Agarawal Vs the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and Ors.