WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ORS. versus SAMIR K. SARKAR

Citation: [1999] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 675 · Decided: 17-09-1999 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.B. PATTANAIK · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

t' 
-
-
WEST BENGAL STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
SAMIR K. SARKAR 
SEPTEMBER 17, 1999 
[G.B. PATTANAIK AND UMESH C. BANERJEE, JJ.] 
B 
Service Law: 
Appointment on compassionate grounds-West Bengal State Electricity 
Board Office order 15.3.1993-Providingfor grounds on which appointment C 
can be claimed, but putting embargo on appointment in certain cases if 
ground arose within two years from scheduled date of superannuation of the 
employee-Held, embargo is valid-Office order cannot be said to be 
discriminatory-Constitution of India-Article 14. 
The respondent, on the death of his father, who was an employee under D 
the appellant - Electricity Board, applied for appointment on compassionate 
ground. The Board rejected the application on the ground that since the 
employee died within two years of his scheduled date of superannuation, the 
respondent was not entitled to appointment. ,,'.fhe Board relied on an office 
order dated 15.3.1993 regarding appointment on compassionate grounds. E 
The said office order provided for consideration for employment of dependant 
of (i) employees whose death was caused due to accident arising out of and 
in the course of employment, (ii) employees rendered totally disabled due to 
an accident arising out of and in the course of employment; (iii) employees 
dying in harness; (iv) employees reported missing and (v) employees declared 
lunatic. It was further provided in Clause (a) titat where the death under F 
clause (iii) or incident under clause (iv) or declaration under clause (v) took 
place within two years from scheduled date of superannuation, any case for 
employment would not be considered. The writ petition filed by the respondent 
was dismissed by Single Judge of the High Court. But the Division Bench 
held that disentitling appointment on compassionate ground only in respect G 
of clauses (iii) to (v) and not in case of clauses (i) and (ii) was discriminatory 
and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, and directed consideration of 
the case of respondent for appointment. Aggrieved, the Board filed the present 
appeal 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
. 
675 
H 
676 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999] SUPP. 2 S.C.R. 
A 
HELD : 1. The embargo contained in ciause (a) of West Bengal State 
Electricity Board Office Order dated 15.3.1993 is valid. The High Court 
erred in holding that the embargo was violative of Article 14 of the 
Constitution. [678-F) 
1.2. Clauses (i), (ii) of the Office Order deal with death arising out of 
B and in the course of employment or total disablement arising out of and in 
the course of employment whereas clauses (iii) and (iv) have no relationship 
with the employment. In that view of the matter, there is a reasonable 
classification and consequently the embargo that no employment would be 
considered when criteria under clauses (iii), (iv) and (v) are satisfied, if such 
C criteria happen to be within two years from the scheduled date of retirement 
on superannuation, cannot be held to be discriminatory. [678-E) 
1.3. Admittedly, the death of the father of the respondent occurred 
within two years preceding the date of superannuation, and, therefore, the 
respondent will not be entitled to compassionate appointment under the office 
D order dated 15th March, 1993. [678-D) 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5343 of 
1999. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 30.6.98 of the Calcutta High Court 
E in M.A.T. No. 4271of1997. 
F. 
V.R. Reddy, H.K. Puri, S.K. Puri, Rajesh Srivastava and Ujjwal Banerjee 
for the Appellants. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
PATT ANAIK, J. Leave granted. 
The West Bengal State Electricity Board has come in appeal against the 
judgment of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court dated 30th June 
1998 in M.A. T. No. 4271 of 1997 whereunder the High Court has directed the 
G appellants to consider the case of the private respondent for appointment on 
compassionate grounds: The father of the said respondent, Samir Kumar· 
Sarkar was an employee under the State Electricity Board and he died on 29th 
November 1996 at the age of 56 years I 0 months and 15 days, which was 
within two years from the scheduled date of his retirement on superannuation. 
When the respondent applied for an empl9yment on compassionate ground, 
H the Board rejected his prayer on the ground that under the Rules in question 
~-
-
WEST BENGALSTATEELEC. BOARDv. SAMIRK. SARKAR[ PATTANAIK, J.] 677 
dealing with c

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.