THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.9551 of 2021
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed challenging the impugned Endt.Roc.No.34/B/2020 dated 08.06.2020 rejecting the claim of the petitioner under the scheme of compassionate appointment in the place of his deceased father, who died while in service. A consequential direction is sought to the respondents to reconsider the claim of the petitioner on compassionate grounds.
2. The petitioner filed applications dated 06.01.2020 and 20.02.2020 seeking compassionate appointment of account of the death of his father and the same were rejected vide the impugned proceedings dated 08.06.2020 on the ground that the petitioner is not eligible for appointment as his mother and father are pensioners. The petitioner stated that the he belongs to poor ST community; studied up to X class; his father, late Dasru, died in harness on 24.02.2019, while working as Office Subordinate at the Government Veterinary Hospital (PVC), Khanapur Village and Mandal of Warangal (Rural) District. After sudden death of his father, the petitioner filed the aforesaid applications, which were rejected under the impugned proceedings on the ground that his mother is a pensioner. According to the petitioner, such rejection is arbitrary, unjust, improper and illegal.
3. Heard Mr. Santhapur Satyanarayana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Animal Husbandry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner cannot be treated as an earning member merely because his mother is 2 receiving service pension and family pension. The object of compassionate appointment is a social security measure to help the families of deceased Government employees. Though mother of the petitioner is getting service pension and also family pension, the same is not sufficient to meet her medical needs. He stated that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in WP.No.16242 of 2012 dated 20.06.2013 wherein it was held that family pension is not a ground for rejection of compassionate appointment. The same view is expressed by a learned Single Judge in WP.No.27465 of 2017 dated 30.08.2017, which was affirmed by a Division Bench in WA.No.700 of 2018 dated 29.11.2018 and another Division Bench in WP.No.30329 of 2019 dated 24.07.2019 wherein the Government Memo dated 24.03.2012 was taken note of. He further stated that in view of the above judgments of this Court, the impugned memo is illegal and unsustainable.
5. The issue involved in this writ petition is no more res integra. It was held in several decisions of this court that family pension cannot be treated as an income. In WP.No.16242 of 2013 dated 20.06.2013 it was held as under:
"... Merely because family pension is being paid to the wife of the deceased, the same is not a ground to deprive the benefit of compassionate appointment under this scheme notified by the Government for the children of the deceased who die in harness."
In WA.No.700 of 2018 dated 29.11.2018 (while dealing with a situation wherein compassionate appointment claimants' father was drawing service pension), it was held as under:
"In STATE OF U.P. V/s. BRAHM DATT SHARMA [(1987) 2 SCC 179] , the Supreme Court made it clear that pension is not a bounty but a right earned by the Government servant on the basis of the length of service rendered by him. The same 3 principle was reiterated in D.D.TEWARI (DEAD) THROUGH LRs V/s. UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LTD [(2014) 8 SCC 894]."
In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned proceedings are unsustainable and liable to the set aside.
6. The writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment by thoroughly examining his financial condition and eligibility as per Rules. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J October 1, 2021 DSK