LexTHE CHIEF COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, LUCKNOW & ORS. versus PRABHAT SINGH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2012] 11 S.C.R. 209 THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, LUCKNOW & ORS. v. PRABHAT SINGH (Civil Appeal No. 8635 of 2012) NOVEMBER 30, 2012 [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN AND JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, JJ.] SeNice Law: Appointment on compassionate ground - O.M. dated 5.5.2003 - Held: The. very object of making provision for appointment on compassionate ground, is to provide succour A B c to a family dependent on a government employee, who has unfortunately died in harness - Delay in raising such a claim, o is contradictory to the object sought to be achieved - The norms governing compassionate appointment have to be strictly followed - Where claims for compassionate appointment exceed the available vacancies, a selection process based on comparative compassion gradient of E eligible candidates, has to be adopted - In the instant case, even though the father of the applicant had died on 2.3.1996 he sought judicial redress, for the first time, by approaching the CAT in 2005 - By such time, there was no suNiving right for appointment on compassionate ground under the OM F dated 5.5.2003, as appointment on compassionate ground under the OM is permissible within three years of the death of the bread winner in harness - Order of High Court directing the authorities to appoint the appellant on compassionate ground, against a post in the grade of Tax Assistant or any other post falling in the quota of direct recruitment, is set aside G - Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India, O.M. dated 5.5.2003. 209 H . 210 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012) 11 S.C.R. A ·CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 8635 of 2012. From the Judgment & Order dated 09.08.2011 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. B 33452 of 2008. Sidharth Luthra, ASG, B.K. Prasad, Nakul Dewan, Bhakti Pasrija Sethi, Aditya Singhla, Dinesh Choudhary, Arvind Kumar Sharma for the Appellants. c Saurabh Upadhyay, S.K. Verma, Navin Verma for the Respondent. The following Order of the Court was delivered by ORDER D JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Vijay Bahadur Singh, who was working as a sepoy in the Central Excise and Customs Department and was posted in the Customs Division at Varanasi, died in harness on E 2.3.1996. His son Prabhat Singh applied for appointment on compassionate ground. It seems, that he could not be appointed as such, because there was no vacancy available to accommodate him. His application therefore remained pending. F 3. Having waited long enough, Pra~hat Singh filed Original Application no. 1459 of 2005 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the "CAT-Allahabad Bench"). In his Original Application, G Prabhat Singh prayed for a direction to the respondents to appoint him on compassionate grounds, since his father Vijay Bahadur Singh had died in harness. The CAT-Allahabad Bench disposed of the application filed by Prabhat Singh on 8.12.2005 with a direction to the Commissioner, Central Excise, Allahabad H to take a decision on the representation filed by Prabhat Singh . CHIEF COMMR., CEN. EX. AND CUSTOMS, LUCKNOW 211 v. PRABHAT SINGH [JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, J.] seeking appointment on compassionate ground within three A months. 4. In compliance with the directions issued by the CAT- Allahabad Bench dated 8.12.2005, the Commissioner, Central Excise, Allahabad, adjudicated upon the claim of Prabhat Singh 8 (for appointment on compassionate ground), by an order dated 5.1.2006. A perusal of the aforesaid order inter alia reveals, that the policy instructions pertaining to appointment on compassionate ground envisage, that such appointments can be made only up to a maximum of 5% vacancies, arising under the direct recruitment quota (in any group ·c· or group ·o· C posts). It also emerges from the order dated 5.1.2006, that the Ministry of Finance, vide its letter dated 19.7.2001, restrained the authorities from, filling up any vacancies by way of direct recruitment. In compliance therewith, the department had not made any appointment by way of direct recruitment since D December, 2000. Accordingly, in the absence of appointment against direct recruitment vacancies, no compassionate appointment could have been made. This therefore constituted one of the reasons for not appointing Prabhat Singh on compassionate ground. The order pa
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.