Dismissed

Niraj Kumar Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC7 Mar 2024WPC/1083/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought compassionate appointment in place of his deceased elder brother, an ex-employee who died in 2006. Court noted another brother's claim had been rejected and he later died; the petitioner was under 10 at the time of death. With over 17 years elapsed, the purpose of compassionate appointment no longer survived, so petition dismissed.

What the court decided

AI extract

Niraj Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand — Service and Employment | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 1083 of 2023

¶2

Niraj Kumar Das, aged about 25 years, Son of Late Triloki Ravidas, resident of village – Barsot, P.O. – Barsot, P.S – Barhi, district – Hazaribag, Jharkhand … … Petitioner

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand

¶5

The Deputy Commissioner, Giridih, P.O. & P.S – Giridih, district – Giridih, Jharkhand

¶6

The District Welfare Officer, Giridih, P.O. & P.S – Giridih, District – Giridih, Jharkhand

¶7

The Deputy Commissioner cum – District Magistrate, Giridih, P.O. & P.S – Giridih, District – Giridih, Jharkhand

¶8

The Principal/In-charge Principal, Scheduled Caste Residential High School, Kharagdiha, P.O. & P.S – Kharagdiha, District – Giridih, Jharkhand … … Respondents

¶9

¶10

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

¶11

¶12

For the Petitioner : None For the Respondents : Mr. Kishore Kr. Singh, Advocate

¶13

¶14

06 /07.03.2024 This writ petition has been filed for the following relief:

¶15

“i. To take a decision and to consider for appointment on compassionate ground in place of his elder brother namely Late Shankar Ravidas in the light of letter No.10167, dated 01.12.2015 issued by the Secretary, Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms & Rajbhasa. And / or

¶16

Pass such other order/orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.”

¶17

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner is absent.

¶18

3. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the elder brother of the petitioner namely Shankar Ravidas had expired on 25.09.2006 and thereafter his brother namely Manoj kumar Das had applied for compassionate appointment and his claim was rejected by meeting dated 11.11.2011 and thereafter Manoj kumar Das also expired on 30.05.2012. Now the petitioner is seeking compassionate appointment in place of his brother Shankar Ravidas who had expired on 25.09.2006. The learned counsel also submits that the petitioner has moved this Court in the year 2023 and his brother Shankar Ravidas had expired on 25.09.2006. He also submits that as per Annexure – 5, on 24.01.2007, the petitioner was 10 years of age. The learned counsel submits that much time has elapsed and otherwise also the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

¶19

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the respondents and going through the materials on record, this Court finds that even as per the

¶20

¶21

writ petition, the brother of the petitioner who was in employment of the respondents namely Shankar Ravidas had expired on 25.09.2006; his another brother namely Manoj Kumar Das who was 17 years of age as on 24.01.2007 as per Annexure – 5 had applied for compassionate appointment and his claim was rejected vide order dated 11.11.2011 on the ground that brother is not entitled for compassionate appointment and thereafter Manoj Kumar Das expired on 30.05.2012.

¶22

5. Thereafter, a circular was issued by the State Government in the year 2015 whereby the brother has been made entitled for compassionate appointment.

¶23

6. Now the petitioner is seeking compassionate appointment in place of his brother Shankar Ravidas (ex-employee) who had expired on 25.09.2006. Further, the Annexure – 5 to writ petition indicates that at the time of death of Shankar Ravidas on 25.09.2006, the petitioner was less than 10 years of age. The fact remains that Manoj Kumar Das who had applied for compassionate appointment was never granted such appointment. The petitioner is claiming appointment in connection with death of Shankar Ravidas (ex-employee) who had expired as back as on 25.09.2006 and more than 17 years have elapsed. Manoj Kumar Das who was denied compassionate appointment also expired as back as on 30.05.2012. This Court is of the considered view that no fresh cause of action arises for the petitioner to claim compassionate appointment on account of circular issued by the respondents dated 01.12.2015. The writ petition has been filed on 21.02.2023. Moreover, much time has elapsed and the very purpose of compassionate appointment does not survive any more.

¶24

7. In view of the aforesaid fact and circumstances, this Court finds that the petitioner is not entitled for compassionate appointment and no relief as prayed for by the petitioner can be granted in this writ petition.

¶25

8. Accordingly, this writ petition is hereby dismissed.

¶26

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

¶27

Saurav/

Niraj Kumar Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Niraj Kumar Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Kumar Alias Sanjay Sao Alias Sanjay Sao Kanhu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Asha Prakash Vs the State of Jharkhand through Secretary Deptt of School Education and Literacy Development

Jharkhand State Electricity Bo Vs M/S K.Y.S.Manufacturers And Exp

Dominica Tirkey Vs the Union of India through Home Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs

Manu Manjhi Vs Central Coalfields Limited

Suchit Pandit Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary