Mandroop Singh vs State Personnel Departmentors
2021 Latest Caselaw 293 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17255/2013

Mandroop Singh S/o Gurdyal Singh, Village Manohar Pura, Post-
Dhulwa, District Jhunjhunu Raj.
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
1.     The    State      Of     Rajasthan          Through        The     Secretary,
       Department Of Personnel, Rajasthan, Jaipur
2.     The Secretary To The Govt. Deptt. Of Medical And Health
       Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur
3.     The    Director,        State      Soldier        Welfare        Department,
       Rajasthan, Jaipur
4.     The District Collector, Jhunjhunu Raj.
                                                                  ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dharmpal Singh Dhaka For Respondent(s) : Mr. Surendra Meel

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

Judgment / Order

15/01/2021

1. The petitioner by way of this writ petition has submitted that

he is an ex army personnel who was injured during Kargil War in

Military and operation known as O P RAKSHAK. He was severely

injured and wounded by a Grenade splinters and remained

admitted in hospital for long time. Thereafter, he was released and

medically boarded out with 50% disability in service on 1.6.2003.

2. The petitioner has four dependents including three children

and wife and, he therefore, applied on 13.4.2010 as per the

Government notification dated 30.10.2008 for compassionate

(2 of 4) [CW-17255/2013]

appointment of his dependent son as available to wards of defence

personnel suffering causality/ disability during war. The application

of the petitioner was forwarded by the District Soldier Welfare

Office, Chirawa to the District Collector Jhunjhunu who refused to

acceded to the requests and directed to the petitioner to get

medical conducted in SMS Hospital. The SMS Hospital refused to

issue disability certificate resulting in the denial of benefits of

compassionate appointment to the petitioner's son as the Collector

rejected the application vide his letter dated 30.4.2012. After

making due representation which was not acceded to, the

petitioner has preferred this writ petition before the Court.

3. Reply has been filed by the respondents wherein it is stated

that even though the Military authorities may have declared the

petitioner 50% disabled but as the Medical Board of the SMS

Medical College has not issued a disability certificate, therefore,

compassionate appointment to the war of defence personnel

boarded out on account of medical disability cannot be given.

4. I have considered the submissions.

5. Admittedly, as per the scheme noted by the State

Government and recognized by the DOP vide its circular dated

3.4.2010, the dependents of such personnel who have been

disabled during war or while serving as against the enemies would

be entitled for getting compassionate appointment. In spite of

such circular having been issued, it is surprising that the Collector

should first insist on another Medical Board being constituted for

the defence person form a civil hospital. A perusal of the Board

constituted by the SMS Hospital, shows that they have not

(3 of 4) [CW-17255/2013]

examined the petitioner at all and they have just mentioned that

he can do his work independently and, therefore, would not come

in disabled category without examining his medical position.

6. On the other hand, this Court finds that the Army Medical

Board proceedings mentions about elbow fracture shaft of

humerus has been blasted by Granade and the disability is 50%

for life. The grenede splinter injury is on the right hand, left leg

below knee and left hip during O P Rakshak on 19.12.2001. In

view of such certificate having been issued by Military Office, no

question could have been raised by the there District Collector,

Jhunjhunu for denying compassionate appointment to dependent

of the disabled defence personnel. Such action amounts to

unnecessary harassment of the defence personnel and shows that

the concerned authority has no compassion towards the members

of the defence force who are ready to sacrifice their life for the

civilian population of India.

7. Such attitude is deprecated by this court and the Chief

Secretary is directed to take appropriate action against the

concerned District Collector who was posted in Jhunjhunu at that

relevant time who passed orders rejecting application without

application of mind i.e. 30.4.2012. No such power was available

with him under the circular of 30.10.2008.

8. That apart this court also deprecates the attitude adopted

by the Secretary, Department of personnel in not examining the

case in terms of their own circular issued for the purpose of

granting compassionate appointment to the ward of a disabled

defence personnel having suffered disability during OP Rakshak.

(4 of 4) [CW-17255/2013]

9. In view of the aforesaid, this writ petition is allowed. The

respondents are now directed to take immediate steps and

considered grant compassionate appointment to one of the ward

named by the petitioner in service. The case shall not be rejected

on the ground of over age. The exercise shall be conducted

expeditiously within a period of one month.

10. A cost of Rs. 1 lac. is imposed on the State Government for

not immediately taking steps for giving appointment to the ward

of the petitioner.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

Anu /397

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)