Bina Devi vs National Institute Of Technology ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 361 Jhar

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                                   W.P.(S) No. 179 of 2010
                                            With
                                    I.A. No.1200 of 2016

                Bina Devi                                    ...    ...     Petitioner
                                          Versus
                National Institute of Technology and Ors.
                                                      ...       ...       Respondents
                                          ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner : Ms. Akansha Mittal, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Anoop Kr. Mehta, Advocate

---

Through Video Conferencing

---

17/09.02.2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner Ms. Akansha Mittal, is present.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, is also present.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner had expired on 22.03.2005 and the petitioner had made an application on 23.10.2008 and her case was kept pending on the ground that under the instructions of Central Government, the posts were not required to be filled up. She submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgement passed by this Court in L.P.A. No.595 of 2004. Learned counsel submits that it is not in dispute that the name of the petitioner was kept in a separate roster and since the petitioner was not enough educated, she had applied for compassionate appointment against Group - D post. She has also submitted that similarly situated person namely Kanak Kumari has been given appointment on compassionate ground.

4. The learned counsel on behalf of the respondents, on the other hand, while opposing the prayer has submitted that the respondent Institute is governed by the scheme for compassionate appointment of the Central Government and as per the scheme, only 5% post is to be reserved for appointment for the purposes compassionate appointment as and when advertisement is issued for appointment. He also submits that no advertisement was issued for appointment in the Group D post as there is excess number of incumbents in Group D post, and there being no vacancy in Group D post, the petitioner cannot be offered

appointment. He submits that he has a copy of the scheme, but the same is not on record. He undertakes to provide a copy of the scheme to the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as to this Court. The learned counsel for the respondents has also relied upon a judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2013) 3 SCC 310 and submits that the scheme of the compassionate appointment of the Central Government has been elaborately dealt with in this particular judgment.

5. Considering the aforesaid submissions, the matter is adjourned and directed to be posted on 16.02.2022 under the heading for 'Final Disposal'.

6. I.A. No.1200 of 2016 for fixing a date for early hearing is closed as the matter is fixed for final disposal.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Saurav