SPA/205/2020
2021 Latest Caselaw 127 UK

   THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

                  AT NAINITAL
        ON THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

                      BEFORE:

    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAGHVENDRA SINGH
                 CHAUHAN, C.J.

                        AND

 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.

         SPECIAL APPEAL NO.205 OF 2020



BETWEEN:

Uttarakhand   Cooperative   Sugar   Mills    Federation
(Uttarakhand Sugars), through its Managing Director,
Railway Crossing, Badripur Road, Jogiwala, Dehradun
and another
                                        .....Appellants.
    (By Mr. T.A. Khan, learned Senior Counsel
    assisted by Mr. Vinay Bhatt, learned counsel).

AND:

  1. Satvinder Singh Sandhu, S/o Late Sri Sukhdev
    Singh, R/o Ward No.13, Gharat Gali Chowk,
    Bazpur, Dehradun.
    (By Mr. S.K. Mandal, learned counsel).


  2. State of Uttarakhand, through Secretary in the
    Department of Cane Development and Sugar
    Industries, Civil Secretariat, Dehradun.
    (By Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Standing Counsel).
                                     .....Respondents.
                                     2

      This special appeal coming on for hearing this
day, Hon'ble Shri Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
delivered the following judgment:

                           JUDGMENT

This Special Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 06.08.2020, passed by the learned Single Judge, in Writ Petition (S/S) No.2120 of 2019.

2. By the impugned judgment dated 06.08.2020, the learned Single Judge has directed the appellants (respondent nos.2 and 3 in the writ petition) to consider the case of the respondent-writ petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground in accordance with the policy existing prior to 12.06.2018, within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order. The learned Single Judge has relied upon a judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No.38 of 2020, wherein it has been held that the ban imposed on compassionate appointment vide Government Order date 12.06.2018 will not apply retrospectively to cases where application seeking compassionate appointment was made earlier.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants, has placed reliance upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "N.C. Santosh vs. State of Karnataka", passed in Civil Appeal Nos.9280-9281 of 2014 on 04.03.2020, wherein it has been held that the norms prevailing on the date of consideration of application seeking compassionate appointment shall govern the field and the norms prevailing on the date of death will have not application. Learned Senior Counsel for the

appellants, thus, submits that the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge is flawed and needs to be interfered with.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. From perusal of the record, it is apparent that the death of writ petitioner's father had occurred on 13.12.2017 and soon thereafter, he made an application seeking compassionate appointment on 18.01.2018. Annexure No.3 to the Writ Petition, which is the recommendation made by the Assistant Manager to the Executive Director, Sugar Mill on 02.02.2018, indicates that the claim of the writ petitioner and three other persons for compassionate appointment was placed before the Executive Director for appropriate orders. We have been informed that the Executive Director, Sugar Mill is the competent authority for making appointments to Class III and IV posts.

6. On the said recommendation, the Executive Director passed an order on 02.02.2018, directing the subordinate officers to consider the applications seeking compassionate appointment against existing vacancies, chronologically.

7. It is, thus, apparent that the claim of the writ petitioner was placed before the competent authority on 02.02.2018 and the competent authority instructed his subordinate officers to do the needful in the matter as per the existing policy. Thus, in such view of the matter, the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "N.C. Santosh vs. State of Karnataka", passed in Civil Appeal

Nos.9280-9281 of 2014 on 04.03.2020, does not support the case of the appellants, as the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the said judgment held that it is the date of consideration of application, which is relevant for deciding which norms will apply to a particular case. The new policy banning compassionate appointment was enforced much later on 12.06.2018. Therefore, it will not have any retrospective operation.

8. Even otherwise also, no positive direction has been issued by the learned Single Judge to the employer (appellants herein) to appoint the writ petitioner on compassionate ground. The direction issued is to consider the claim of the writ petitioner in accordance with law, with the rider that the ban imposed by Government Order dated 12.06.2018 will not apply in the case of the writ petitioner.

9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge that calls for any interference. Accordingly, the Special Appeal fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.

10. No costs.

(Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, C.J.)

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) NISHANT