Manoj Verma vs Oil & Natural Gas Commission Ltd. & ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 382 UK

              HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                         Writ Petition (S/S) No.1702 of 2020

Manoj Verma                                                                   ......Petitioner

                                               Versus


Oil & Natural Gas Commission Ltd. & another                                 ....Respondents


Present: Mr. Shashank Upadhayay, Advocate for the petitioner.
         None for the respondents.

                                        JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Petitioner seeks the following reliefs:-

"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent no. 2 for consideration of compassionate employment as dependent of deceased serving employ in their organisation under 'Dying in Harness Scheme' sympathetically in their spirit of OM issued by Govt. of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (DOPT) dated 16th January, 2013.

(b) Issue any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

2. It is the case of the petitioner that his mother was working in Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Limited (for short "ONGC"). She died on 16.04.2018. After her death, the petitioner represented for appointment on compassionate ground, which was not considered. The petitioner served a legal notice to the respondents on 06.07.2020. In response to which, on 21.07.2020, the petitioner was replied that he is not eligible for employment under the Scheme. This communication dated 21.07.2020 (Annexure No. 1) is impugned in the instant writ petition.

3. Respondents were served with the notices. Office has reported that according to India Post Service, "Item Delivery - confirmed upon the respondents". In view of it, service is sufficient upon the respondents, but none is present for the respondents today.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner through video conferencing.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the notice has been wrongly replied by the respondents and the case of the petitioner has not been appreciated or considered in view of Office Memorandum dated 16th January, 2013 F.No. 14014/02/2012-Estt. (D) Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel & Training) (for short "Office Memorandum dated 16th January, 2013).

6. Reference has been made to Clause 18 (c) of the Scheme for Compassionate Appointment, and it is argued that any amount received by the petitioner as welfare measure, should not come in his way for appointment on compassionate ground. What is argued is that the respondents may be directed to consider the fresh representation, to be made by the petitioner, in view of Office Memorandum dated 16th January, 2013. Copy of Office Memorandum dated 16th January, 2013 is annexed as Annexure No. 7. Clause 18 (c) of it, inter alia, provides that "an application for compassionate appointment should, however, not be rejected merely on the ground that the family of the Government servant has received the benefits under the various welfare schemes. While considering a request for appointment on compassionate ground a balanced and objective assessment of the financial condition of the family has to be made taking into account its assets and liabilities (including the benefits received under the various welfare schemes mentioned above) and all other relevant factors such as the presence of an earning member, size of the family, ages of the children and the essential needs of the family, etc."

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 2 to decide the representation of the petitioner that may be given by him within a period two weeks from today.

8. The writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioner shall submit a fresh representation before respondent no. 2 within two weeks from today. Once the representation is submitted, respondent no. 2 shall decide it in accordance with Office Memorandum dated 16th January, 2013 (Annexure No. 7) or in the light of any other Rule or direction that is in force, within a period of eight weeks from the date such a representation is made by the petitioner.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 22.02.2021 AR/