Patna High Court
Mukesh Kumar vs The Union Of India, Through The ... on 24 July, 2025
Author: Partha Sarthy
Bench: Partha Sarthy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.473 of 2023
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10301 of 2020
======================================================
1. Mukesh Kumar S/o Late Guneshwar Prasad Singh Permanent resident of
Vill.- Gokhulchak, P.O.- Ramcharitra Maidan, P.S.- Harpur, District-
Munger, State- Bihar, PIN- 811213, at present residing at Quarter No.
CF/11, Barauni Refinery Township, District- Begusarai, State- Bihar, Pin-
851117.
2. Shobha Devi, W/o Late Guneshwar Prasad Singh Permanent resident of
Vill.- Gokhulchak, P.O.- Ramcharitra Maidan, P.S.- Harpur, District-
Munger, State- Bihar, PIN- 811213, at present residing at Quarter No.
CF/11, Barauni Refinery Township, District- Begusarai, State- Bihar, Pin-
851117.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The Union of India, through the Secretary, the Ministry of Petroleum and
Natural Gas, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi- 110001.
2. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Through its Chairman, Registered Office at
Indian Oil Bhavan, G-9, Ali Yavar Jung Marg, Bandra (East), Mumbai,
Maharastra, Pin code- 400051 and Corporate Office at Plot-3079/3, Sadiq
Nagar, J B Tito Marg, New Delhi- 110049.
3. Director (HR), Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Corporate Office at Plot-
3079/3, Sadiq Nagar, J B Tito Marg, New Delhi- 110049.
4. Director (Refineries), Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Scope Complex Core
27, Institutional Area, Lodhi Road, New Delhi- 110003.
5. Indian Oil Corporation Limited Barauni Refinery through its Chief General
Manager (Human Resources), P.O.- Barauni Oil Refinery, District-
Begusarai, Bihar, 851114.
6. Chief General Manager (Human Resources), Indian Oil Corporation
Limited, Barauni Refinery, P.O.- Barauni Oil Refinery, District- Begusarai,
Bihar, 851114.
7. Deputy General Manager (Human Resources), Indian Oil Corporation
Limited, Barauni Refinery, P.O.- Barauni Oil Refinery, District- Begusarai,
Bihar, 851114.
8. Manager (ER), Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Barauni Refinery, P.O.-
Barauni Oil Refinery, District- Begusarai, Bihar, 851114.
9. Assistant Manager (ER) Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Barauni Refinery,
P.O.- Barauni Oil Refinery, District- Begusarai, Bihar, 851114.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Mrigank Mauli, Sr. Adv.
Mr.Amresh Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Additional Solicitor General
For IOCL : Mr. Ankit Katriar, Adv.
======================================================
Patna High Court L.P.A No.473 of 2023 dt.24-07-2025
2/11
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 24-07-2025
The present appeal has been filed under Clause -X
of the Letters Patent of Patna High Court Rules, 1916, in which,
the appellants have challenged the order dated 28.11.2022
passed by learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 10301 of 2020.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of the present
appeal are as under:-
2.1 The appellants/original petitioners filed a petition
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in which they
have prayed for direction to respondent nos. 2 to 9 to appoint
petitioner no. 1 on a suitable post in Staff Category in Indian Oil
Corporation Limited, Barauni Refinery or any other Refinery of
Indian Oil Corporation Limited or any Division of Indian Oil
Corporation Limited as per Superannuation Benefit Fund
Scheme (in short 'SABF') Rehabilitation Scheme of the Indian
Oil Corporation Limited.
2.2 It is the case of the petitioners that petitioner no. 1
completed B.Tech degree and now is currently pursuing I.T.I. in
trade Electrician from the concerned institution. It is further
stated that late Guneshwar Prasad Singh, father of petitioner no.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.473 of 2023 dt.24-07-2025
3/11
1 and husband of petitioner no. 2 died on 26.09.2018 while in
employment of Baraui Refinery of Indian Oil Corporation
Limited. At the time of his death, he was working as Mechanical
Engineer (MLE) in L&D Department in Barauni Refinery.
2.3 It is the further case of the petitioners that the
respondent Corporation has framed a scheme for rehabilitation
of the family of the employee dying or suffering permanent total
disablement while in service. As per the said scheme, three
options have been provided, i.e. (designated R-1, R-2A and R-3)
for the rehabilitation of the family. It is stated that the aforesaid
scheme was explained to the petitioners and, thereafter, the
petitioners opted for R-3.
2.4 It is also the case of the petitioners that petitioners
belong to OBC category and required application form for
exercising option no. R-3 of rehabilitation scheme was duly
submitted and petitioner no. 2 nominated her son/petitioner no.
1 for employment under the aforesaid scheme. It is further
stated that vide communication dated 28.01.2019 issued by the
concerned officer of the respondent Corporation, it was
informed to petitioner no. 2 that petitioner no. 1 is more than 26
years of age, hence, he cannot be appointed under Officer
Category under the aforesaid scheme.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.473 of 2023 dt.24-07-2025
4/11
2.5 Petitioners have also averred that in the meeting
held on 01.02.2019, the claim of petitioner no. 1 was rejected
on frivolous ground that, as per the existing guidelines, there is
no provision for induction of Graduate Engineer in Staff
Category. It is the case of the petitioners that respondents never
offered to provide petitioner no. 1 an opportunity of acquiring
the requisite qualification by extending the normal waiting
period of three years upto seven years.
2.6 The petitioners, therefore, filed the captioned writ
petition.
2.7 The learned Single Judge, vide impugned order
dated 28.11.2022, dismissed the writ petition filed by the
petitioners and, therefore, the petitioners have filed the present
appeal.
3. Heard Mr. Mrigank Mauli, learned senior counsel
for the appellants and Mr. Ankit Katriar, learned counsel for the
respondent /Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
4. Mr. Mrigank Mauli, learned senior advocate
appearing on behalf of the appellants would mainly contend that
the learned Single Judge has not properly appreciated the fact
that the respondents were required to grant period of three years
utpo seven years to the appellant no. 1 for acquiring the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.473 of 2023 dt.24-07-2025
5/11
qualification prescribed in the scheme. It is also contended that
the learned Single Judge has wrongly placed reliance upon the
provisions contained in notes to para 6(i) i of the WRQ and
thereby wrongly observed that as the appellant no. 1/petitioner
no. 1 is possessing higher professional qualification, i.e.
Bachelor of Engineering (B.E.), he is not eligible for the benefit
given under the scheme. Learned counsel would further submit
that now petitioner no. 1 has acquired qualification of I.T.I. as
per the scheme. He, therefore, urged that the impugned order be
set aside and thereby the respondents be directed to grant benefit
to appellant no. 1 as per option R-3 exercised by the appellants
under the aforesaid scheme.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondents has opposed the present appeal.
Learned counsel would mainly contend that the learned Single
Judge has not committed any error while dismissing the writ
petition filed by the present appellants / petitioners.
6. Learned counsel contends that appellant no. 1 is
possessing higher qualification i.e. B.E. and as per the
provisions contained in notes to para 6(i) i of qualification
parameters under open advertisement category, he is not
entitled for grant of period of three years utpo seven years to
Patna High Court L.P.A No.473 of 2023 dt.24-07-2025
6/11
for acquiring the qualification prescribed in the scheme.
7. It is further submitted that, as per the scheme in
question, more particularly R-3, the option which, the appellants
exercised, the qualification would be Matric + I.T.I. in the
related trades. It is also contended that as the petitioner no. 1
was possessing the higher qualification, his case cannot be
considered. It has further been contended by the learned counsel
that the time for acquiring qualification of three years to
maximum limit of seven years, can be granted to such candidate
who is not possessing the requisite qualification (I.T.I.). In the
present case, appellant no. 1 was already possessing the higher
qualification of B.E., therefore, there was no question of
granting time of three years to seven years for acquiring
qualification of I.T.I. Learned counsel for the respondents has
placed reliance upon the decision rendered by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Canara Bank vs. Ajitkumar G.K.;
reported in AIR 2025 SC 1232.
8. We have considered the submissions canvassed by
the learned counsel for the parties. We have also perused the
materials placed on record. At the outset, we would like to refer
the relevant clause of SABF, i.e., Scheme for rehabilitation of
the family of the employee dying or suffering permanent total
Patna High Court L.P.A No.473 of 2023 dt.24-07-2025
7/11
disablement while in service:-
"R-1 ---------
R-2A --------
R-3 For employment of otherwise eligible, suitable
and dependent unmarried son/daughter (which
shall also include son/daughter legally adopted
prior to the death of the employee", the following
provisions shall apply:
a) Employment of eligible son/daughter must be
sought within 6 months of the death or permanent
disablement of the employee, and be sought in the
prescribed format. Employment under the scheme
will be offered within a period of three years.
b) A dependent son/daughter on possessing the
prescribed qualification and fulfilling the job
specifications will be considered for employment
provided there is a regular induction level vacancy
of a type, within three years of the death/permanent
disablement of the employee, for which a person of
his/her age, background, qualifications attainments
and physical fitness would have been otherwise
considered."
c) The minimum qualification to be eligible under
Option R -3 of SABF shall be matric +ITI in the
related Trades or other higher induction level
qualification as per existing policy.
d) In case the dependent ward does not possess the
induction level qualification, as stated above,
he/she shall be provided an opportunity to acquire
Patna High Court L.P.A No.473 of 2023 dt.24-07-2025
8/11
such qualification by extending the existing normal
waiting period of three years to a maximum limit of
seven years, based on merit of each case to be
approved by Divisional Hqrs.
e) ----------
f) ----------
g) ----------
h) ----------
I) ----------
9. Clause -10 of SABF provides that no provision of
this scheme will be deemed to constitute any claim, right or
entitlement on the part of anybody. Further, recruitment action
6(i) provides for qualification parameters under the open
advertisement category for various posts under the respondent
Corporation. Notes to para 6 (i) i provides as under:-
"Candidates possessing higher professional
qualification such as BE, MBA, CA, LLB, MCA or
any such equivalent qualification shall not be
eligible.
10. Keeping in view the aforesaid provisions contained
under the scheme as well as the policy of the respondent
Corporation for recruitment, if the contentions raised by learned
counsel for the parties are examined, it is revealed that on
01.02.2019
counseling session was called for by the
respondents. It was pointed out to the appellants/petitioners that
as per the existing recruitment framework, there is no provision
Patna High Court L.P.A No.473 of 2023 dt.24-07-2025
for induction of a graduate engineering workman into Staff
Category. Petitioner no. 1, in fact, has completed his graduate
engineering degree and is possessing B.E. and, therefore, he
cannot be inducted on the post in question. We are of the view
that the extension of time for acquiring I.T.I. for a period of
three to seven years cannot be granted to petitioner no. 1. In
fact, the said clause is incorporated in the scheme for granting
benefit to the nominated ward of the deceased employee who is
undergoing his/her education and is not yet eligible. Thus,
under the policy of appointment on compassionate ground, it
was decided by the respondent Corporation to allow such ward
of the deceased employee to complete his education and get the
minimum qualification within an extended period of seven
years. In the present case, the appellant no. 1 is already
possessing the degree of B.E., therefore, there was no question
of granting him time for acquiring the qualification of I.T.I. We
are of the view that the aforesaid contention is misconceived.
11. Even from the notes to para 6 (i) i, which we have
already reproduced herein-above, it transpires that candidates
possessing higher professional qualification of BE, MBA, CA,
LLB, MCA or any such equivalent qualification shall not be
eligible. Thus, in the present case, appellant no. 1/ petitioner no.
Patna High Court L.P.A No.473 of 2023 dt.24-07-2025
1 who already possessed qualification of B.E., which is a higher
qualification, is not entitled to get the benefit of R-3 of SABF.
In the case of Canara Bank (Supra), the Hon'ble Supreme
Court has observed in paragraphs 44 and 45 as under:-
"44. As pertinently held in B. Kishore (supra),
indigence of the dependants of the deceased
employee is the fundamental condition to be
satisfied under any scheme for appointment on
compassionate ground and that if such indigence is
not proved, grant of relief in furtherance of
protective discrimination would result in a sort of
reservation for the dependents of the employee
dying-in-harness, thereby directly conflicting with
the ideal of equality guaranteed Under Articles 14
and 16 of the Constitution. Also, judicial decisions
abound that in deciding a claim for appointment on
compassionate grounds, the financial situation of
the deceased employee's family must be assessed.
In a situation otherwise, the purpose of the scheme
may be undermined; without this evaluation, any
dependent of an employee who dies while in
service might claim a right to employment as if it is
heritable.
45. The ratio decidendi of all these decisions have
to be read in harmony to achieve the noble goal of
giving succour to the dependants of the employee
dying-in-harness, who are genuinely in need, and
not with the aim of giving them a post for another
Patna High Court L.P.A No.473 of 2023 dt.24-07-2025
post. One has to remember in this connection the
caution sounded in Umesh Kumar Nagpal (supra)
that as against the destitute family of the deceased
there are millions of other families which are
equally, if not more, destitute".
12. We have also gone through the reasoning recorded
by learned Single Judge while passing the impugned order. We
are of the view that the learned Single Judge has not committed
any error while dismissing the petition filed by the present
appellants / petitioners. Hence, no interference is required in the
present appeal.
13. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
14. Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(Vipul M. Pancholi, CJ)
( Partha Sarthy, J)
sunilkumar/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE N/A
Uploading Date 29.07.2025
Transmission Date N/A
