Raj Kumari Jaiswal vs Federation Of India Export ...
2002 Latest Caselaw 26 Del

JUDGMENT

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a suitable employment on compassionate grounds in view of the demise of her husband on 20.2.92. Thus husband of the petitioner was working with the respondent organisation.

2. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is entitled to be appointed in a category 'D' post under the rules dealing with the employment n compassionate consideration. The rules have been reproduced in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent. The relevant rule is an under :-

"Efforts have been made to cover all rules as prevalent in Government offices. However, wheresoever the rules are silent, the Government Rules will be followed."

In this regard, reference needs to be drawn to the "Eligibility Conditions" for compassionate appointments as mentioned in Chapter 29 oft he C.C.S. Rules. The said conditions are as follows:-

Eligibility

(a) Compassionate appointments can be made only against direct recruitment quota.

(b) Applicants for compassionate appointment should be appointed only if they are eligible and suitable for the post in all respects under the provisions of the relevant. Recruitment Rules.

(c) Departments are, however, competent to relax temporarily educational qualifications in the case of the appointment at the lowest level, i.e., Group 'D' or LDC post, in exceptional circumstances where the condition of the family is very hard.

Such relaxation will be permitted up to a period of two years beyond which no relaxation of educational qualifications will be admissible and the services of the persons concerned if still unqualified, are liable to be terminated.

(d) Where a widow is appointed on compassionate ground to a Group 'D' post she will be exempted from the requirements of educational qualification,s provided the duties of the post can be satisfactorily performed without having the educational qualification of Middle standard prescribed in the Recruitment Rules.

3. Mr. Vinay Bhasin, learned senior counsel for the respondent, has stated that all efforts were made to accommodate the petitioner but the petitioner could not be so accommodated in view of her being almost illiterate. In the counter affidavit also it is averred that the petitioner was not given a job as she did not satisfy the minimum educational qualification. It is further stated that in any case there is no vacancy available with the answering respondent where the petition can be accommodated.

4. Certain further affidavits have also been filed thereafter on behalf of the respondent including the affidavit dated 14.12.2000 in which it is stated that by virtue of a memorandum issued by the Ministry of Commerce the respondent organisation was not permitted to recruit Group 'D' employees against their positions in any case and Ministry of Commerce specifically instructed that no grant would be available for payment of salaries enhanced or otherwise including implementation of Vth Pay Commission's recommendations. This office memorandum is dated 10.11.97.

5. In the facts of the present case the case of the petitioner has to be tested on the basis of the rules and guidelines existing for compassionate employment on the date when the petitioner was so eligible. The learned counsel for the petitioner, referring to the rules has stated that though admittedly the petitioner did not possess the minimum qualifications which is then stated to be 8th class pass, the petitioner was entitled to be considered for employment under para D of the eligibility condition. In terms of para D case of a widow to be considered on compassionate grounds for a Group D post stipulates that exemption from requirement of educational qualifications can be granted if the duty to the post can be performed satisfactory without having educational qualification of middle standard prescribed under the eligibility condition. There is no document placed on record to show the educational qualification on behalf of the petition but the learned counsel for the petitioner states that she is 5th class pass and this fact has been disclosed to the respondent at the stage when her case was examined. On the other hand, Mr. Vinay Bhasin, learned senior counsel for the respondent, has contended that the case of the petitioner was examined but taking into consideration the nature of duties to be performed even by Group D post employees a totally uneducated person would not be able to perform any of the duties satisfactorily.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the rival contentions. As stated above, the case of the petitioner has to be decided on the basis of the eligibility condition which she admittedly does not possess. Thus the only question to be examined is whether her case can be considered under sub para D and the educational qualification relaxed. Such relaxation of educational qualification is permissible only provided the duties to the post can be satisfactorily performed without having educational qualification. The respondent on affidavit has categorically stated that despite efforts to accommodated the petitioner no job fit to be performed by the petitioner could be found specially taking into consideration the nature of work of the respondent organisation. It is not possible for directions to be issued by the court contrary to such guidelines even though in certain situations it creates hardship. There is no doubt about the fact that the demise of the husband of the petitioner almost 10 years ago would have created requirement for income and alternative employment. Unfortunately, the petitioner was not qualified nor could a job be found fit for her.

7. In view of the aforesaid situations it is not possible to issue any directions in favor of the petitioner as prayed for. However, the oral representation of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner may be considered even for a post where she may do some menial work may be considered sympathetically by the respondent organisation within a period of four weeks.

8. With these observations the petition stands disposed of.