Dismissed

Lalvendra Ray v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC25 Jul 2012CWJC/12772/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a writ petition seeking compassionate appointment for the petitioner following his mother's death. The court held that compassionate appointment is not a right but an exception to merit-based recruitment, requiring proof of no other income source. The petitioner's ambiguous affidavit and age rendered the claim untenable.

What did the court decide?

The writ application for directions for compassionate appointment was dismissed.

Lalvendra Ray Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12772 of 2012

¶2

====================================================== 1. Lalvendra Ray S/O Ganga Ram Ray Resident Of Village - Nareypur West, Panchayat Rani -1, P.O. P.S. And Block - Bachhawara, District - Begusarai

¶3

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Principal Secretary, Human Resources Development Department, Bihar, Patna

¶4

The Deputy Secretary, Department Of Personnel And Administrative Reforms, Bihar, Patna

¶5

The District Magistrate, Begusarai

¶6

The District Education Officer, Begusarai

¶7

The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Begusarai

¶8

The Mukhia-Cum-Chairman Panchayat Teachers , Employment Unit, Gram Panchayat, Raj Dadupur, Employment Unit, Gram Panchayat Raj - Dadupur, P.O.- Rupasbaj, P.S. And Block - Bachhawara, District - Begusarai 8. The Panchayat Secretary Cum Secretary, Panchayat Teachers Employment Unit, Gram Panchayat Raj Dadupur, P.O. Rups Baj, P.S. And Block - Bahhawara, District - Begusarai

¶9

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Sharma For the Respondent/s : Mr. Pawan Kr. Mishra Gp22 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 25-07-2012 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State.

¶11

The petitioner seeks directions to consider and appoint him on compassionate grounds pursuant to the death of his mother in harness on 4.10.2009.

¶12

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that he is the second out of three brothers. His father is unemployed and the only bread winner of the family was his mother. His elder brother and younger brother both do not need compassionate appointment as they are well off and their wives are also working as ANM in Government Hospitals. The eldest brother is

¶13

Patna High Court CWJC No.12772 of 2012 (2) dt.25-07-2012

¶14

¶15

only Class VIII pass and is not eligible to be considered for compassionate appointment which is limited to Matriculate. His father also has sworn an affidavit that he has no objection to the petitioner’s appointment. The elder brother had filed an objection to his claim for appointment which was “ill motivated”. The petitioner was an Intermediate and thus eligible to be considered. The petitioner was considered for appointment but has been informed under the Right to Information Act that in view of the objection by his elder brother he could not be appointed. While considering the objection the respondents did not allow the petitioner to submit his reply to the same.

¶16

Counsel for the State has opposed the application that compassionate appointment was not a matter of right.

¶17

Every employment in Government constitutes a national wealth and according to the mandate of Article 14 it can be made only by an open advertisement and competitive merit selection. An exception to the same has been carved out by way of compassionate appointment more in the nature of sympathy to bring succour to the family of the deceased due to the untimely death of the only bread winner leaving the family with no other source of income. Being an exception to the Rule for appointment in accordance with Article 14, any claim for compassionate appointment has to be considered strictly in accordance with the guidelines regulating the same.

¶18

The sine qua non for consideration of the claim of the petitioner shall be that the family has no other source of income. Keeping in mind the social mores the mother may have been an additional source of income when there shall be a presumption that the father of the petitioner was also gainfully employed. He is stated to be alive. He swears an affidavit on 9.1.2010 that he has no objection for the appointment of the second son. Curiously it is silent and refrains from disclosing his own status but simply

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.12772 of 2012 (2) dt.25-07-2012

¶20

¶21

states that if compassionate appointment is provided to the petitioner he can be looked after well. The language can have more than one connotation. If he was employed the appointment of the petitioner will provide additional income in the house to enable the father to have a better standard of living. The affidavit of the father is non committal and leaves the Court unsatisfied.

¶22

The petitioner is stated to be 37 years of age and acknowledges to be married. He has not made any disclosure whether he has begotten any children from the marriage. Applying the standards of a common prudent person, the petitioner is advanced in age and could not have been sitting idle all these years, entering into matrimonial relationship, taking on the responsibility of another life, without having work for himself. He had to lay out some explanation how he has survived all these years and had the financial capacity to enter into a matrimonial relationship and support the life of another also.

¶23

The fact that his elder brother may be ineligible on the ground that he was only Class VIII pass and thus ineligible to be appointed may have been a good argument if the elder brother had agreed that the petitioner shall look after him also. The two brothers appear to be at logger heads in the background of the fact that the petitioner has no vested right to claim compassionate appointment.

¶24

Individual dissension in the family, sibling rivalry is sufficient to defeat the claim of compassionate appointment which otherwise is a weak right as noticed in 2004 (2) PLJR 453 (D.B.).

¶25

The jurisdiction for compassionate appointment oft considered has been explained in (2010) 11 SCC 661 (State Bank of India v. Raj Kumar) as follows:-

¶26

“8. It is now well settled that appointment on compassionate

¶27

Patna High Court CWJC No.12772 of 2012 (2) dt.25-07-2012

¶28

¶29

grounds is not a source of recruitment. On the other hand it is an exception to the general rule that recruitment to public services should be on the basis of merit, by an open invitation providing equal opportunity to all eligible persons to participate in the selection process. The dependants of employees, who die in harness, do not have any special claim or right to employment, except by way of the concession that may be extended by the employer under the rules or by a separate scheme, to enable the family of the deceased to get over the sudden financial crisis. The claim for compassionate appointment is therefore traceable only to the scheme framed by the employer for such employment and there is no right whatsoever outside such scheme. “

¶30

The Court therefore finds it difficult to grant any relief to the petitioner of the nature sought.

¶31

But if the petitioner within a reasonable time satisfies the authorities that his father had no source of income, how the petitioner himself managed to survive till the age of 37 years, undertaking responsibility of another human life by marriage and the siblings resolved their controversy the respondents if otherwise satisfied may consider the claim. This however cannot be presumed to be open ended affair with no time limitation for the petitioner.

¶32

The writ application is dismissed with the aforesaid observations.

¶33

(Navin Sinha, J)

¶34

Snkumar/-

Lalvendra Ray v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalvendra Ray v. The State Of Bihar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Archana Kumari and Anr. Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Dr.Lalan Jha Vs Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sans

Chandrashekhar Prasad Nirala Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Giridhar Kumar Sharma Vs the Patna Municipal Corporatio

Zeba Noor Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Lalan Prasad Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.