Dismissed

Vijay Alias Vijay Kumar Rajwar v. The Union Of India General Manager Eastern Railway And Ors.

Jharkhand HC14 Feb 2018WPC/3500/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand dismissed a Writ Petition filed by Vijay @ Vijay Kumar Rajwar seeking compassionate appointment for his son. The petition was barred by limitation as the original application had been dismissed in 2004.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's application for compassionate appointment was dismissed as it was hopelessly barred by limitation.

Vijay Alias Vijay Kumar Rajwar Vs The… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 3500 of 2016

¶2

Vijay @ Vijay Kumar Rajwar

¶3

-----Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The Union of India General Manager, Eastern Railway, Kolkata

¶6

The Divisional Railway Manager, Eastern Railway, Asansole, Burdwan

¶7

The Divisional Personnel Officer, Eastern Railway,

¶8

Asansole Division, Burdwan ----- Respondents

¶9

¶10

CORAM: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ratnaker Bhengra

¶11

For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajiv Lochan, Advocate

¶12

For the Respondents: Mr. Gautam Rakesh, Advocate

¶13

¶14

05/ 14.02.2018 There are several defects which have not been removed, though writ petition

¶15

was filed in July 2016. Though, no one appeared on earlier two occasions on behalf of the petitioner, but time was granted for removal of defects.

¶16

We have gone through the impugned order and pleadings on record. The Original Application No. 051/00086/2015 seeking a direction upon the Respondents to provide compassionate appointment to the applicant, son of the second wife, was dismissed by the Learned Central Administrative Tribunal as being hopelessly barred by limitation and being devoid of merit. Bare facts from the record reveal that the father of the applicant died on 05.01.1998 in harness and his application for compassionate appointment was rejected as far back on 28.10.2004. The Original Application seeking compassionate appointment was filed in 2015. Learned Tribunal relied upon the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal Vs. State of Haryana [(1994) 4 SCC 138] and was of the considered view that in such circumstances, the main purpose of compassionate appointment has also been frustrated. In these circumstances, the Original Application was held to be hopelessly barred by limitation. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to improve upon the case of the petitioner / applicant any further than what has been noticed herein-above to invite our interference.

¶17

Learned counsel for the Respondent Railways has taken the Court to the foundational facts noted in the impugned order and the pleadings on record in support of his submission that no interference can be made in such stale matter seeking compassionate appointment.

¶18

In such circumstances, we do not intend to grant any indulgence in the matter. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed.

¶19

( Aparesh Kumar Singh, J )

¶20

( Ratnaker Bhengra, J)

¶21

Ranjeet/

Vijay Alias Vijay Kumar Rajwar v. The Union Of India General Manager Eastern Railway And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Alias Vijay Kumar Rajwar v. The Union Of India General Manager Eastern Railway And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

All India Prograssive Womens Association Aipwa Vs Don Bosko Tech Don Bosko Yuva Kendra and Otehrs

Bipin Bihari Vs the State of Jahrkhand and Another

Radhe Krishna Prasad Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Roshan Kumar Saw And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Ifatekar Ahamad Khan Vs Home Department

Bushara Khatoon Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.