Delhi High Court
Shobhit Srivastava & Ors. vs National Thermal Power ... on 1 November, 2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: November 01, 2017
+ W.P.(C) 5861/2017
SHOBHIT SRIVASTAVA & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Alakh Alok Srivastava,
Advocate
versus
NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION (NDPC)
LIMITED & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Puneet Taneja and Ms.
Shaheen, Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)
1. In this petition, compassionate appointment is sought by first
petitioner in view of untimely death of his father, who was working as
Senior Manager in National Thermal Power Corporation (hereinafter
referred to as NTPC).
2. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that as per Clause 5.8 of
the Memorandum of Agreement (Annexure P-3) between the employees
and the employer/respondent-NTPC, an employee is entitled to
compassionate appointment. However, the stand of respondent-NTPC in
its counter affidavit is that the Memorandum of Agreement (Annexure P-
3) is applicable to workmen and not to Officer Class which includes
Executive as well as Non-Executive, but not Trainees/Apprentices.
Learned counsel for petitioners further submits that compassionate
employment has been granted in cases of Shakuntala Bai Pandey (Smt.)
v. National Thermal Power Corporation Limited, 1995 Supp (3) SCC
680; Smt.Mala Singh v. National Thermal Power Corporation in W.P.(C)
5641/1998 rendered on 11th July, 2011 by Allahabad High Court and
Pitambar Das Manikpuri v. National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. &
Ors., 2012 SCC OnLine Chh 95 and so, on parity, first petitioner is also
entitled to compassionate appointment.
3. Learned counsel for respondents draws the attention of this Court
to NTPC Employees' Family Economic Rehabilitation Scheme of 17th
April, 2001 (Annexure R-1) to submit that petitioner's mother has already
availed of the benefits under this Scheme and that the purpose of
compassionate appointment is to rehabilitate and since the rehabilitation
has been already provided to wife of deceased in terms of Policy
(Annexure R-1), therefore, first petitioner is not eligible for
compassionate appointment.
4. Upon hearing and on perusal of extract of Clause 5.8 of
Memorandum of Agreement (Annexure P-3), the material on record and
the decisions cited, I find that NTPC Employees' Family Economic
Rehabilitation Scheme of 17th April, 2001 (Annexure R-1) gives the
definition of an employee as under: -
"DEFINITIONS
i) XXXX
ii) XXXX
iii) "Employee" shall mean any person in the
regular scale of pay in whole time employment of the
Company and is admitted in this Scheme"
5. Relevantly, the Scheme (Annexure R-1) is voluntary and Clause
10.2 thereof clinches the issue. It reads as under: -
"OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS
10.1 XXXX
10.2 The benefits would be admissible only in case
no employment has been provided by the Company to any of
the dependants on compassionate grounds or otherwise in
NTPC or in any of its subsidiary, joint venture, or sister
concerns."
6. The scope and coverage of Rehabilitation Scheme (Annexure R-1)
as spelt out in Clause 3.1 is as under: -
"3.0 SCOPE & COVERAGE
The scheme will cover all regular employees (both
executives and non-executives excluding trainees/
apprentices). The scheme will also cover full time
Functional Directors of the Company in regular scale of
pay."
7. A bare perusal of afore-noted extracts of Rehabilitation Scheme
(Annexure R-1) and Clause 5.8 of Memorandum of Agreement (Annexure
P-3) and definition of employee in the said Scheme (Annexure R-1), it
becomes amply clear that this Scheme governs Executives and Non-
Executives, but not a workman. Clause 10.2 of the Rehabilitation Scheme
(Annexure R-1) does give the impression that compassionate appointment
can be provided to executives and non-executives of NTPC and if it is not
provided, then only the benefits under the Scheme can be availed of.
Clause 5.8 of the Memorandum of Agreement (Annexure P-3) reads as
under: -
"It is agreed that Management will provide
employment to one dependent of each workman who is
permanently disabled or dies as a result of accident while
on duty on compassionate and humanitarian
considerations. Dependent for this purpose will mean
spouse of the employee, his/her son or daughter or legally
adopted son or daughter only."
8. A plain reading of the aforesaid Clause 5.8 of the Agreement
(Annexure P-3) makes it clear that mere use of word 'employee' in it, does
not mean that the executives of NTPC are covered under this Agreement
(Annexure P-3). Pertinently, this Agreement (Annexure P-3) relates to
class of workmen of NTPC, whereas the Rehabilitation Scheme
(Annexure R-1) pertains to the executive class of NTPC. Undisputedly,
mother of first petitioner, who seeks compassionate appointment, has
already drawn benefit under the Scheme (Annexure R-1).
9. During the course of hearing, it was put to petitioners' counsel as
to whether mother of first petitioner is ready to forego the benefits drawn
under the Rehabilitation Scheme (Annexure R-1) and the reply was in the
negative. Otherwise also, petitioners being legal heir of a deceased
executive of NTPC are not entitled to compassionate appointment as
petitioners have already availed of the benefits under the Rehabilitation
Scheme (Annexure R-1). Reliance placed upon decision of Chhattisgarh
High Court in Pitambar Das (supra) and decision of High Court of
Allahabad in Mala Singh (supra) are of no assistance to the case of
petitioners as in the said cases, the deceased-employees did not belong to
the executive class and the Rehabilitation Scheme (Annexure R-1) herein
was not the subject matter therein. Also, Supreme Court's decision in
Shakuntala Bai (supra) is of no avail as in the said decision, the deceased
was a workman whereas in the instant case, the deceased was an
Executive who is not covered by Memorandum of Agreement (Annexure
P-3) but is covered by the Rehabilitation Scheme (Annexure R-1).
10. Purpose of providing appointment on compassionate ground is to
mitigate the hardships due to the death of the bread-earner of the family.
In the instant case, this purpose already stands achieved as the benefit
under the Rehabilitation Scheme (Annexure R-1) already stands extended
to wife of the deceased. Therefore, relief of compassionate appointment
cannot be granted to legal heirs of deceased executive of NTPC on
account of his untimely death.
11. In view of the aforesaid, finding no substance in this petition, it is
dismissed.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
NOVEMBER 01, 2017
s
