Amrita Sinha DECISION
Amrita Sinha, J.
1. The prayer of the petitioner for being appointed on compassionate ground has been rejected by a communication dated 16th July, 2015. The same is impugned in the instant writ petition.
2. The mother of the petitioner was a Group-D employee (peon) in the office of the Greater Calcutta Gas Supply Corporation Limited. She died in harness on 24th July, 2007. The petitioner made an application for being appointed on compassionate ground on 23rd August, 2007. As the application of the petitioner was not taken up for consideration, the petitioner along with nine other similarly circumstanced persons moved a writ petition before this Court. The said writ petition being WP No. 10387 (W) of 2013 was considered by the Court and disposed of by an order dated 5th June, 2013 whereby the Court directed the respondents to take a final decision on the claim of the applicants and communicate it to them as early as possible but not later than a specified time that was indicated in the order.
3. As the order of the Hon'ble Court was not complied with, the petitioner along with others moved a contempt application before the Court. In the meantime the prayer for appointment of the petitioner was rejected. After noticing the said order of rejection the Court disposed of the contempt application on 23rd September, 2016 by recording that the Bench was satisfied that there has been substantial compliance of the order dated 25th June, 2013 and, accordingly, the contempt application stands disposed of. However, the Court observed that the petitioners, who have not been offered an appointment shall be entitled to challenge the order of rejection in an appropriate proceeding before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.
4. Pursuant to the leave granted by the Court the petitioner has filed the instant writ application.
5. The grounds for rejection of the petitioner's prayer have been specifically mentioned in the order of rejection. It was mentioned that (i) due to the increasing trend of huge revenue loss year over year because of decreasing consumption of coal gas by the consumers; (ii) increasing trend of expenditure for running the establishment; and (iii) gradual decrease of area of operation because of various reasons and all such factors contributing to non-requirement of additional manpower in Group-C and D categories the respondent Corporation has taken a decision that there was no scope to consider the prayer of the petitioner.
6. The order rejecting the prayer for compassionate appointment appears to be a perfectly reasoned one. The Corporation has assessed the requirement of man power, running expenditure etc. and arrived at a specific finding that there was no requirement of additional staff. In the absence of any cogent ground made out in the writ petition to assail the said findings of facts the reasons for rejecting the prayer of the petitioner cannot be faulted.
7. That apart, the order was passed on 16th July, 2015 and the petitioner has challenged the same in the year 2019. No reason whatsoever has been mentioned in the writ petition for filing the writ petition at such a belated stage.
8. Prayer for appointment on compassionate ground is considered on urgent basis as the same is meant to tide over the sudden crisis faced by the family of an employee on the untimely death of the bread earner. In the instant case, the employee concerned expired in the year 2007. In the year 2019 there is hardly any scope or reason to show compassion. The immediate crisis which was faced by the petitioner in the year 2007 no longer subsists in the year 2019.
9. It is settled law that appointment on compassionate ground is not a matter of right and the same is not a mode a regular employment. It is a concession and compassion that is shown to the family of the employee who died in harness. The criterion for showing compassion is palpably missing in the instant case.
10. In view of the above, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in the instant case.
11. WP 355 of 2019 stands dismissed.
12. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.
13. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied expeditiously in compliance of usual legal formalities.
© Manupatra Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd.