Disposed

Balasubrahmaniom M.D. v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

Kerala HC21 Mar 2024WP(C)/11830/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Compassionate appointment rejection letter was a one-line order without disclosing reasons. Court quashed the rejection and directed reconsideration under the GIC scheme's clause 17, with hearing to petitioner via video conference within two months.

What did the court decide?

Rejection order quashed; respondents directed to reconsider application per scheme clause 17(iii), (v), with video conference hearing, within two months

Balasubrahmaniom M.D. Vs Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 11830 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

BALASUBRAHMANIOM M.D.

¶8

MANIYAMKALLIL HOUSE, KORUTHODE, MUNDAKAYAM,

¶9

KOTTAYAM - 686 513.

¶10

BY ADVS. B.RAGHUNATHAN M.SALIM R.SRINATH LIJO KURIAN JOSE DR.STANLY CHAZHOOR K.JALADHARAN V.M.JACOB

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. REPRESENTED BY CHAIRMAN CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., HEAD OFFICE, A- 25/27, ASAF ALI ROAD, NEW DELHI - 110 002.

¶13

2 REGIONAL MANAGER

¶14

ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, METRO PALACE, OPPOSITE NORTH RAILWAY STATION, KOCHI - 682 018.

¶15

3 SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE 2, TRIO CHAMBERS, KANJIKUZHY, KOTTAYAM - 686 004.

¶16

BY ADVS. JACOB MATHEW KAITHALIL GEORGE CHERIAN (SR.) GEORGE A.CHERIAN

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC 11830/2022

-2-

JUDGMENT

(Dated this the 21^st day of March, 2024)

¶22

The mother of the petitioner filed an application for

¶23

getting compassionate appointment on the death of her husband, Mr.Divakaran M.K, for his elder son/petitioner herein. The said request has been rejected by Ext.P2 letter

¶24

dated 16.06.2017 which reads as follows:

¶25

“This has reference to the captioned matter and the application send by you in this regard. We regret to inform you that the Competent Authority has not approved your appointment on compassionate grounds.”

¶26

Since the rejection letter did not disclose the

¶27

reasons, the petitioner filed Ext.P3 request seeking disqualification for not granting the compassionate

¶28

appointment. No reply was forthcoming. Therefore, Exts.P5 and P6 representations filed before the 1^st respondent for

¶29

reconsideration of the rejection order in Ext.P2. Though

¶30

WPC 11830/2022

¶31

the said representations were filed as early as 2017 and

¶32

2018, till date, no orders are passed. Therefore, the petitioner seeks issue of writ of certiorari, quashing Ext.P2 and reconsidering of Ext.P1 application in the light of the guidelines.

¶33

A counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of

¶34

respondents, and the main contention raised is that the petitioner’s father was aged 58 years at the time of his death on 02.01.2015 and he was to retire on 30.09.2016.

¶35

He was survived by his wife, who was employed as a Cashier in the State Bank of Travancore at that time, and her date of retirement was on March 2017. A status report was obtained from Senior Divisional Manager, Kottayam and it shows that the petitioner’s mother has received the terminal benefit of Rs.25,13,142/- and a monthly family

¶36

WPC 11830/2022

¶37

-4-

¶38

pension of Rs.19,787/- and monthly income on terminal

¶39

benefits will come to nearly Rs.14,650/-. The mother of the petitioner is also retired, and she is also earning Rs.20,000/as pension.

¶40

Therefore, any compassionate appointment can

¶41

only be under Ext.P4 scheme. The said scheme specify that

¶42

the coverage is only to the dependent family member of the permanent employee who dies while in service and it is a settled proposition of law that compassionate appointment is given to the family members to tide over the immediate

¶43

financial crisis.

¶44

Sr. Counsel further argues that though the

¶45

rejection order is in 2017, the petitioner has approached

¶46

this Court only in 2022, and it shows that there is no financial crisis to the family, and it is only an afterthought.

¶47

WPC 11830/2022

¶48

-5-

¶49

Ext.P2 is the rejection order of the application for

¶50

compassionate appointment. As stated above, it does not show the reason for rejection, and it only says that the Competent Authority has not approved the appointment. Ext.P4 is a scheme for compassionate appointment.

¶51

The counsel for the petitioner relies on subclauses (iii) and (v) of clause 17 of Ext.P4 and submits that while Ext.P2 is issued, the same has not been taken into consideration.

¶52

I accept the contention raised by the counsel for

¶53

the petitioner, as it is a one line order and very cryptic. Therefore, I have no hesitation to quash Ext.P2 and direct the reconsideration of Ext.P1 application in the light of Ext.P4 scheme, more particularly, sub-clauses (iii) and (v)

¶54

of clause 17. Orders shall be passed in this regard within

¶55

WPC 11830/2022

¶56

-6-

¶57

a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy

¶58

of the judgment. The petitioner shall be given an opportunity of hearing through Video Conference before orders are passed.

¶59

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

BASANT BALAJI JUDGE

WPC 11830/2022

-7-

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11830/2022

¶66

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶67

Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE MOTHER OF PETITIONER TO 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 23/2/2015.
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF 3RD RESPONDENT ADDRESSED TO PETITIONER DATED 16/6/2017.
Exhibit P3	TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER TO 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 2/8/2017.
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY OF THE SCHEME FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT OF THE GENERAL INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA.
Exhibit P5	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER TO 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 25/10/2017.
Exhibit P6	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 5/6/2018.

Balasubrahmaniom M.D. v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balasubrahmaniom M.D. v. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.

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

Biju.P.C., Vs State of Kerala

Meppady Grama Panchayath Vs the State of Kerala

K. Asokan Vs State of Kerala

Yohannan.K.P Vs the Chairman and Managing Director

Arunkumar S. Vs the Travancore Devaswom Board

Senan S Vs Regional Cancer Centre (Rcc)