LexFOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANR. versus NIZAMUDDIN AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2010] 3 S.C.R. 580
.,
A
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANR.
B
v.
NIZAMUDDIN AND ANR.
(Civil Appeal No. 2627 of 2010)
MARCH 23, 2010
[R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, JJ.]
Service Law: Compassionate appointment - Offer of
voluntary retirement and request for compassionate
C appointment when not interlinked or conditional - Each
request to be decided independently even if both the requests
made in same letter - On facts, voluntary retirement on
medical grounds sought after completion of 55 years of age
- Application of son of retiree for compassionate appointment
D rightly rejected as circular dated 3. 7.1996 provided that
benefit of compassionate appointment was available to" the
dependents of departmental workers who sought voluntary
retirement on medical grounds within the age limit of 55 years
E
- Circular dated 3. 7.1996 issued by FCI.
On 16.2.1998, second respondent gave a letter to the
employer-appellant seeking retirement on medical
grounds and appointment of his son on compassionate
grounds. The employer granted permission to the second
F respondent to retire w.e.f. 30.4.2000. On 19.4.2003, the first
respondent, son of second respondent submitted an
application seeking compassionate appointment.
Therei'.!fter, on 8.3.2003, the respondents filed a writ
petition before the High Court seeking a direction to
G employer to appoint first respondent on compassionate
grounds. High court passed,interim direction to the
employer to pass a spea~ing order on the said
application. The employer passed order dated 13.3.2003
holding that since the second respondent had crossed
H
58p
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANR. v.
581
NIZAMUDDIN AND ANR.
the prescribed age of 55 years, the application for A
compassionate appointment could not be entertained.
Subsequently, Single Judge of High Court dismissed the
writ petition. However, Division Bench of High Court held
that the first respondent was eligible for compassionate
appointment under the relevant scheme. Hence the B
appeal.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: Appellant by its circular dated 3.7.1996
extended the benefit of compassionate appointment to C
dependants of departmental workers who sought
voluntary retirement on medical grounds subject to the
condition that the worker who sought voluntary
retirement on medical grounds should apply within the
age limit of 55 years for the purpose of availing the D
benefits of compassionate appointment. The second
respondent sought voluntary retirement on medical
grounds on 16.2.1998, after completion of 55 years. As
the Scheme provided that benefit under it was available
only if the worker sought voluntary retirement on medical E
grounds before completin-g the age of 55 years, the
application for compassionate appointment was liable to
be rejected. In this case the offer of voluntary retirement
in the application was neither conditional nor-mtei'linked.
It merely contained two requests that is permission to F
retire voluntarily on medical grounds and request for
appointment for his son, without any interlinking. Nor
was the voluntary retirement conditional upon giving
employment to his son. Each request had to be
considered on its own merits with reference to the rules/ G
scheme applicable. When so done, the first respondent
would not be entitled to compassionate appointment.
[Paras 4, 5, 7) [584-E-F; 585-C-D; 587-F-H; 588-A]
Food Corporation of India v. Ram Kesh Yadav (2007) 9 H
.582
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2010] 3 S.C.R.
A SCC 531, held inapplicable.
Case Law Reference:
(2007) 9 sec 531
held inapplicable
Para 3
B
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.
2627 of 201 o.
From the Judgment & Order dated 18.5.2007 of the High
Court of Allahabad in Special Appeal No. 579 of 2005.
C
Govind Goel, Ambuj Agarwal, Nitin Singh, Brijeshwar
D
Singh, Dr. Kailash Chand for the Appellants.
Bharat Sangal for the Respondents.
-The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
R.V. RAVEENDRAN, J. 1. Second respondent was an
employee of the appellant - Food Corporation of India ('FCI'
for short). His date of birth was 8.2.1943. On 16.2.1998, the
· second respondent gave a letter seeking retirement on medical
E grounds and appointment of his son on compassionate
grounds. The said letter is extracted below:
F
G
H
"Sub: Retirement on medical grounds and appointment of
son/close relatives on compassionate grounds.
I am working as H.L. in F.S.D. ChExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.