Patna High Court
Most. Sonbarsi Devi vs The Union Of India And Ors on 25 June, 2024
Author: Purnendu Singh
Bench: Purnendu Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19598 of 2012
======================================================
Most. Sonbarsi Devi Wife Of Late Ram Karan Ram Resident Of Village-
Husepur Kalhata Kamal, Police Station- Maharajganj, District- Jan Pat
Azamgarh U.P.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union Of India, New Delhi
2. The Managing Director, Food Corporation Of India, 16/20, 12 Khambha
Road, New Delhi
3. The Zonal Manager, Food Corporation Of India, 10a Middleton Road,
Calcutta- 700071 West Bengal
4. The Executive Director East Zone Food Corporation Of India, Zonal Office
East Kolkata- 700071
5. The Regional Manager, Food Corporation Of India, Exhibition Road, P.S.-
Kotwali, Patna Bihar
6. The Manager, Food Corporation Of India, Panchananpur, Gaya, District-
Gaya
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramadhar Shekhar, Advocate
For the FCI : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Verma, Sr. Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, CGC
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 25-06-2024
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner informs that the petitioner's husband had died on
18.09.1978
, while working on the post of Assistant grade II(D),
Food Corporation of India (in short 'the F.C.I') at Food Storage
Depot, Gaya. Petitioner had approached the authority
concerned for retiral dues and compassionate appointment of
her son to meet the hardship faced by the family. It has been
Patna High Court CWJC No.19598 of 2012 dt.25-06-2024
submitted that the deceased employee was the sole bread earner
and the family's livelihood depended on her husband's income.
Learned counsel further submitted that till date full amont of
retiral dues has not been paid and her claim for compassionate
appointment has been rejected on frivolous ground and in this
background seeks quashing of the order dated 19.12.2011, by
which the claim of the petitioner for appointment of her son on
compassionate appointment has been denied.
3. Per contra Mr. P.K. Verma, learned Senior Advocate
appearing on behalf of the Food Corporation of India submitted
that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing
C.W.J.C. No. 8859 of 2010 for similar reliefs and this Court
vide order dated 19.05.2010, considering the pleadings made in
said writ petition and the relief sought for by the petitioner, had
directed the petitioner to file a representation before the
respondent No. 4 giving the details of unpaid claims and the
respondent No. 4 was directed to consider the claims of the
petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably
within a period of four months on receipt of such representation.
Learned senior counsel submitted that in compliance of the
order dated 19.05.2010 passed by this Court, the respondents
have taken steps to make payment of entire retiral dues to the
Patna High Court CWJC No.19598 of 2012 dt.25-06-2024
petitioner and in this respect specific statement has been made
in paragraph Nos. 5, 6, 7 and 8.
4. Learned counsel however, admits that no information
has been given whether the entire amount of interest accrued
under different heads of retiral dues was paid from the effective
date i.e after the death of the petitioner's husband on
18.09.1978. In absence of correct information the same is
required to be verified by the Corporation.
5. Learned senior counsel has further submitted that, so
far as, the claim of the petitioner that her son be considered to
be appointed on compassionate ground cannot be sustained as it
is an admitted fact that soon after the death of the deceased
employee the petitioner or her son had not claimed or had filed
application before the competent authority for considering the
claim for appointment of her son on compassionate ground and
in this regard learned senior counsel has relied on circular of
the Department of Personnel and Training, Government of
India, by referring required criteria mentioned therein in
paragraph no. 5 of the order dated 19.12.2011. Learned counsel
submits that the claim of the son of the petitioner for
compassionate appointment has been rejected in view of the
conditions mentioned in paragraph No. 5.
Patna High Court CWJC No.19598 of 2012 dt.25-06-2024
6. Heard the parties.
7. I find it apt to reproduce paragraph no. 5 of the
order dated 19.12.2011 inter alia is as follows :-
"As per policy of the Respondent's
Corporation, the compassionate appointment
previously used to be made upon death of an
employee against the vacancy of the Direct
Recruitment Quota and there were number of
instructions pertaining to compassionate
appointment The instructions regarding
compassionate appointment are prescribed in the
office Memorandum No. 14014/6/94-Estt(D)
dated 09.10.1998 revised/simplified and
consolidated the then existing instructions from
making compassionate appointment under
Central Govt. by way of scheme to supersede all
the existing instructions and No. 14014/19/2002-
Estt(D) dated 05.05.2003 of Govt. of India,
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and
Pension."
8. It is well settled principle of law settled by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court that a person seeking compassionate
appointment is required to show that the family is faced with the
hardship as a result of death of the sole bread earner of family.
In the present case the petitioner has sustained her family and
herself after the death of her husband which took place on
18.09.1970.
9. The husband of the petitioner had died on 18.09.1978
and the petitioner had never approached the authority either for
Patna High Court CWJC No.19598 of 2012 dt.25-06-2024
payment of retiral dues of her husband or getting her son
appointed on compassionate ground rather from the record, it is
found that an imposter in the name of the petitioner had got
herself appointed on compassionate ground in the year 1979,
which was detected by the respondent in the year, 1994 and
order of termination was passed along with recovery of wages
etc., along with interest vide order dated 17.05.1994 against the
impostor. Thereafter the decision of the Corporation was subject
matter of money suit No. 60 of 1997. The competent civil Court
vide judgment and decree dated 31.08.2005 has declared that the
petitioner herself being defendant No. 2 to be the real wife of
Late Ram Karan Ram by framing following issues :
" 1) Is the suit as framed maintainable ?
2) Has the plaintiff got valid cause of action for the
suit ?
3) Is the suit barred by law of acquiescence,
waiver, and estoppel ?
4) Is the suit barred by law of limitation ?
5) Is the suit barred by non-joindor and mis-
joindor of necessary parties ?
6) Is the defendant no. 1 legal married wife of Late
Ram Karan Ram ?
7) Is the defendant no. 2 impostor and her heirs
son and daughter of Late Ram Karan Ram ?
8) Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief as
claimed by him ?
Patna High Court CWJC No.19598 of 2012 dt.25-06-2024
9) Whether the written statement of defendant no. 2
can be treated as counter claim if so whether
defendant no. 2 is entitled for relief as claimed in
the so-called counter-claim ?
10) To what relief or reliefs, the plaintiff is entitled
for ?"
10. On the basis of the discussion made in the judgment,
a specific finding has been given in respect of the entitlement of
the petitioner in paragraph No. 13 that the defendant No. 1 is
not a legally weded wife. Based on the said judgment, the
petitioner claimed her entitlement of her son for being
considered to be appointed on compassionate ground had
applied before the authorities of the Corporation along with her
claim for payment of retiral dues in light of the order dated
19.05.2010 in CWJC No. 8859 of 2010 passed by this Court.
11. On perusal of the Counter Affidavit in paragraphs
Nos. 5 to 8 the respondents have stated that the payment of
retiral dues under different heads has been made, however, in
absence of any specific statement as to whether the interest
accrued under different heads of retiral dues was paid from the
effective date i.e after the death of the petitioner's husband on
18.09.1978 is not specific. Law in regard to payment of retiral
dues is well settled in case of D.S. Nakara & Ors vs. Union of
Patna High Court CWJC No.19598 of 2012 dt.25-06-2024
India reported in (1983) 1 SCC 305 and in accordance with the
law laid down by the Apex Court in D.S. Nakara(supra) entitles
for interest on delayed payment from the period the dues has
not been paid from the due date. The petitioner is entitled in
accordance with law the interest well within a period of six
weeks from the date of communication of this
order/representation.
12. So far as the claim of the petitioner for appointment of
her son on compassionate ground, the same I find is not
sustainable considering the fact that the petitioner has sustained
herself and her family till date from the death of her husband
which took place on 18.09.1978. Law in this regard is well
settled by the Apex Court in case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal v.
State of Haryana and Others reported in (1994) 4 SCC 138.
13. The writ petition is accordingly, disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Prakash/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE
Uploading Date
Transmission Date
