Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sayantan Mondal vs The Wbsedcl & Ors on 2 May, 2023
7.
2.5.2023
S.D.
W.P.A. 8587 of 2023
Sayantan Mondal
Vs.
The WBSEDCL & Ors.
Mr. Kalyan Kumar Panda
Mr. Uttam Kumar Roy
.....For the petitioner
Mr. Debanjan Mukherjee
..For the WBSEDCL
This is an application for appointment on
compassionate grounds. The father of the petitioner died-in-
harness on December 18, 2012. He worked as a Senior Sub-
Assistant Engineer with the West Bengal State Electricity
Distribution Company Limited (WBSEDCL). After the death
of the petitioner's father, he applied for being appointed on
compassionate ground through representations made by his
mother. The application of the petitioner was considered
sympathetically even though the petitioner suffered from an
accident on July 17, 2016. The process of appointing the
petitioner went on in 2019 as well when after recovery from
his accident, prayer was renewed for compassionate
appointment. The petitioner submitted all the necessary
documents as required by the authorities in 2020.
Thereafter, on February 4, 2021, the candidature of the
petitioner was rejected by the Manager (HR &A) since the
petitioner suffered from high myopia and his refractive error
was beyond the permissible limit. The said error was found
during the pre-employment medical check up. The
prescription submitted by the petitioner regarding his
eyesight from the Department of Health and Family Welfare,
Government of West Bengal also reflects the fact that the
power in petitioner's right eye was beyond the permissible
limit. The said document is dated April 22, 2019. The dry-
spherical power in the right eye of the petitioner was -7.00
whereas under the norms and standards for medical fitness of
WBSEDCL, the candidates total amount of myopia was not to
exceed -6.00D.
Since the myopia of the petitioner was found beyond
the permissible limit, the candidature of the petitioner was
rejected. The petitioner made a prayer for reconsideration of
his representation for compassionate appointment on
February 22, 2021. Thereafter, no steps were taken by the
petitioner. The writ petition has been filed on March 29, 2023
after 2 years from the date of rejection of the petitioner's
candidature.
Considering the submissions of the parties and the
materials placed on record, this Court is of the view that the
petitioner's prayer for compassionate appointment cannot be
considered due to long passage of time from the death of the
petitioner's father till the filing of the writ petition. The fact
that the petitioner did not challenge the order of rejection for
more than 2 years also goes to show that the family is not in
any financial crisis. The object of compassionate appointment
is to provide immediate succor to the bereaved family
members, to prevent them from living a life of penury.
Compassionate appointment is to be granted for providing
financial assistance to the family members of a deceased
employee to avert the financial crisis that may arise due to the
death of the bread-winner of the family. Due to the long
passage of time from the death of the petitioner's
father/deceased employee and the filing of the writ petition,
this Court is of the view that the prayer for compassionate
appointment of the petitioner cannot be further considered.
Such a view of this Court finds supporting in the
judgment of the Apex Court passed in Civil Appeal Nos.
8842-8855 of 2022 (State of West Bengal vs. Debabrata
Tiwari & Ors.)
Also on merits this Court finds no perversity in the
impugned order of rejection.
In such view of the matter, W.P.A. 8587 of 2023 is
dismissed.
Since no affidavits have been directed to be exchanged
in the present writ petition, all the allegations contained in
the petition are deemed not to have been admitted by the
parties.
All parties shall act on the server copy of this order
duly downloaded from the website of this Court.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied
for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all the
formalities.
(Lapita Banerji, J.)
