Dismissed

Suresh Kumar Sharma and Ors. v. Avvnl and Ors.

Rajasthan HC22 Oct 2019CW/5061/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition where male candidates, offered compassionate appointment as Helper-I, claimed they should have been appointed as LDCs like female candidates. The Court held no right exists to a specific post under compassionate appointment, relying on Supreme Court precedent.

What did the court decide?

None. The petition claiming appointment as LDCs was dismissed; petitioners remain appointed as Helper-I.

Suresh Kumar Sharma and Ors. Vs Avvnl and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUFR *

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5061/2014

¶3

Suresh Kumar Sharma son of Late Shri .Shyam Sunder Sharma, aged about 27 years, b/c Brahmin, Resident Village Khajpur of (Old), Post District Furohito Ki Dhani, Jhunjhunu at present working on the post of Helper-I, office of Assistant Engineer (O&M) AVVNL Jhunjhunu.

¶4

Rajendra Prasad Tanwar S/o Shri Pooran Mal Tanwar b/c Yogi , aged about 43 years, (OBC),; $, * .: RhoJillage & Post Khajpur Naya r ,* ,,; q*--*< District hunjhunu-&j$d '4r6s$nt :i_ y@r&ing on the post of Helper-I, offie(6;&sktant Engineer (o&M)A\v/L Jhunjhunu. f P;.,.,+" %"*"". 3. Rajesh kumai S/o Late Shri Mani Ram 3angidt-ag:ed about 22 %," years, b)$*-?Jangid (OBC), R/o Village & Post uhanaq??strict Jhunjhunu (Raj.) at present working <?+Y of Helper-I, office of Assistant Engineer (O&M) AVVN _jy,wA.-'@:a_** 4. Dwarka Prasad S/o LatepS:hlb3f::@axman Ram Darji, aged 34 @,/;%$ .@ @".$q& +T Y years, R/O Village & Po2r koy,a.~ehk:il%'~h!eetri, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) at prese elper-I, office of Assistant Engine 5.. Mahesh Kuma Chandra, aged 34 years, b/c Verma ( h Senior Secondary School, Khetri, Dist present working on the post of Helpert Engineer (O&M) AVVNL

¶5

I' Khetri Town Distt. Jhu

¶6

Sandeep Kumar , b/c Jat, aged about' 24 years, R/o Villag rict Jhunjhunu (Raj.) office of Assistant at present workin Engineer (O&M),

¶7

Babu Lal Saini S/o Late,Shyi.r.Mal.i. ,Ram. Saini, aged 27 years, . i,.; ,*-cJ: R/o Village Nangal post fJd3pw>fiati,' disfrict Jhunjhunu (Raj.) at present working on the post of Helper-I office of Assistant Engineer, (O&M) AVVNL Udaipurwati, Distt. Jhunjhunu. 8. Rajkumar Son of Shri Manohar Lal aged 23 years, R/o Village Khori, Post ~andawara, Via Sanwali, District Sikar (Raj.) at present working on the post of Helper-I, office of Assistant Engineer (O&M) AVVNL Udaipurwati District Jhunjhunu.

¶8

Kamlesh Kumar S/o Late Shri Ramswaroop Sharma, aged 28 years, b/c Brahmin, R/O Village & Post Indaii, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) at present working on the post of Helper-I office of Assistant Engineer, (Rural) AVVNL Jhunjhunu.

¶9

Virendra Kumar Saini s/o Shri Natthu Ram Saini, by/c Saini

¶10

(OBC), aged 27 years, R/o Gayatri Kutir ,Kuwa, Ward No. 7, Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) at present working on the post of Helper-I, office of Assistant Engineer (O&M) AVVNL Gudhagorji, District Jhunjhunu. 11. Badan Singh S/o Late Shri Jaswant Singh, aged 23 years, b/c OBC, R/o Village & Post Singhnor, Via Bhorki, Tehsil Udaipurwati District Jhunjhunu (Raj.), at present Working on the post of Helper-I, office of Assistant Engineer (O&M) AVVNL Gudhagorji District J hunjhunu.

¶11

¶12

Nemi Chand son of Shri Badri Prasad Saini, aged 26 years, b/c Saini, R/o Village Seya .Das :Ki-D.ha.ni, Post Badawasi, Tehsil , >,\ -.. g Nawalgarh, District' ~hunjhunu (Raj:.) at piesent working on the post of HelpebI, office of Assistant Engin'eer,(O&M) W . y AVVNL g 8 udhaorji-,fs$ict Jhunjhunu +.rT ,,P .I> 13. nar?q*dnh . Tanwar S/o Shri Mahaveer singh'-T&i@ar L4. , aged f z.,., 28 ye8.r~; b/c Rajput, R/o Village & Post panthadriY,$ a~ Tehsil Soorajgarh, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) at present working on the @F:fTw+p-&%% post of Helper-I, office fi+7wp+e5 f Assi&t%E<Engineer +sp2jA+F (O&M) AWNL Pilani District J h u n j h u n u . +rs4r%-g c"" **_-4Q;,** i~#+&@aa mx @+A$& ,J? . & - :tfsbi , ., g~&4s"~.!~~L 8?$*+$$x& 14. Ma noj Sing h S/o?Shr;1Rakai"9 +tgi ,, .~~~ ~ n **** Gf8+~$x,9i'ffgk: :ied * bout a 4g+d ' 24 years, b/c " "La;& $. ,,?? . - ,.:%*+&. Y;'r'h"..iRBa,gad.vD;Isrr;,t Jhunjhunu (Raj.) at Rajput, R/o Kali a.ha$%yqa!;., p ,.., .r **.._ c** V;a .+.: .!< B k#L j+-3,d .$. '-kZi* id* 4;:t.)? ..XI:;+ ;,,/iCI) + :)l.r? present working on tKe?pbSt 'bf+-fl!e:lper;-~, office of Assistant c"* Engineer (O&M) AVVNL Bagad, D'ist. Jhunjhunu.

¶13

Manoj Ku~nar son of hki i-fazari a:l, aged 24 years, b/c Jat, R/o Village & Post ojtu, ehiil , Chi;yaa:;'District '.T.t Jhunjhunu (Raj.) at present working on " ; the' ;'. :;* ,jj,st .:ofiiildlper-, office of Assistant a";i "# I"+ - Gy Tat& . Engineer (O&M) AWN^^^^&^^^^^$^:^^:- .~~~fii:t , "+$ : .% Jhunjhunu. ;.ti,. 5 't,:~~$$<f,~~;~~?f,, -$ik;''? 16. Ishwar Singh sod;.~~.~~~~:":$~~a:a.ndt:hhrma, aged 26 years, z.:;" . , .k~+?i.:a%&pf"f b/c Brahmin, R/o ~~It-,Agwana .-Lqzk, . Sd" .$:? y@jF%%-;i ~4, Khurd, Tehsil & ;g&@$$: $& %&23*?FfiFRd &+ ' .p, . ' Soorajgarh, District J hun)hun.@@a +&&at -) present working on the post of Helper-I, **offie-.of$ssiska;nt~~nineer** iisl Iw--yq &+.%-d . P JL **kp>* (O&M) AWNL %$ * Soorangarl:, District JhITinj'hunu.

¶14

Versus

¶15

I. Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Hathi Bhata, Power House, Jaipur Road, Ajmer through its Managing Director 2. The Secretary (Administration), Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Hathi Bhata Power House, Jaipur Road, Ajmer (Raj.) 3. Chief Engineer, Ajmer Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Jhunjhunu.

¶16

¶17

For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s)	:Mr.Sanjay Mehla : Mr.Ribhu Dutt

¶18

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

¶19

Order

¶20

The petitioners are the ;q2 cand,i,dates who have been offered $ :; y < ??"* "F -3: : ,L?b.: I! "s ,s 'Z ' '. **_,<&4_** 5: 9.; _J_ **_"9_** d appointment on ompasslonate grounds By; ffie yespondent; Nigam 2 %" &' tY+>kJ ^L.. as Helper Gade-I. It is the case of petitioners thatithey should be d$?w+-) a t%--" G&k fferedaointment on the post of LDCs which is beinpaffered to %@ :yr.C the female candidates who applied on compassionate grounds. Learned counsel su brnitsb,.&Q. .a$<ional qualification have I, gy. C * ., ? .. s"..-. :", , been laid down s female candidates cannot be done in terms of Article 16 2. At the outset, arg rned counsel for the petitioners is quite attr at there should not be discrimination b candidates for the purpose of appoint ent case, there is a specific qualification of post, the respondents have classified * - VI **J 2( -=;" 5 ,"2 <s A I meant for compassionate~appointment as LDCs. So far as male and female candidates applied under the compassionate grounds are concerned, compassionate appointment is given to persons who are dependants of the deceased Government servants dying while in service. The purpose of compassionate appointment is well settled and no right exists of such dependant to a particular post.

¶21

Law has already been settled by the Sdpreame Court in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh and Others vs. Pankaj Kumar Vishnoi

¶22

[(2013) I1 SCC I781 wherein the Apex Court has held as under:22. It is accepted position that the respondent appeared in the test and could not qualify. Once he did not qualify in the physical test, the High Court could not have asked the department to give him an opportunity to hold another test to extend him the benefit of compassionate appointment on theq post, of Sub-Inspector solely on .t t.hO yp444, &oPnb el. a idfh$fl$&-e 3: I.?& $3 has been efflux dgtime. The respondent4aft$r-being . %disqggied in the physical tes? coQldp- ot P hae claimed as a matter of righfband .d J% \d.e,r;nand for an appointment in respect d%,a kk,, , .3 barticular post and the High Court could n66'"have granted further opportunity after the crisis was over.

¶23

of Sub-

¶24

In view of the of the view that no right exists for applicants/ petitiom'ers for:opkiolij.:of a particular post to i;j _G"8"_* ,.e,,.<; 6_ $=$ **_9,_** **;;i,i :; . !,,L * !&&-A: ,2 ,. _,$z;i_ $3,'* ',%zy&&::&? ;=.:mp-. .rhwvcs.,"i >k!;w$k be appointed on compas~~p~~~~~e~~~g~~~an~d~~~Accordingly, .., -+$-& **...zLs4.3.-b2...:2-6s_** the claim of the petitioners has fouq:dj&$;$$ &eGjepLdf4merit. Thus the petition .---&"-* r.;. . .". .-..". ' aiMX,;. -.lw ...., .;t s -:' kxt ; $: is dismissed.

¶25

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA), J

Suresh Kumar Sharma and Ors. v. Avvnl and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Kumar Sharma and Ors. v. Avvnl 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

Kailash Chand Verma S/O Govind Ram Verma Vs State of Rajasthan through the Director General of Police

Kundan Mundel S/O Ramniwas Mundel Vs Rajasthan Public Service Commission

Mohan Lal Meena Vs Jaipur Development Authority

Prahlad Babu Dixit Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Rakesh Kumar Gurjar Vs Staff Selection Commi and Anr.

Dharmendra Kumar Saxena S/O Late Shri Amar Kishore Saxena, Vs the State of Rajasthan