- (1.) Petitioner's claim for grant of compassionate appointment, consequent upon death of her husband, in harness, has been rejected, vide order dated 19th May, 2015, reiterated vide order dated 3rd August, 2015 (Annexures-13 and 15 to the writ petition), which are under challenge in the present writ petition.
(2.) Petitioner claims to have been married with Amit Kumar Goswami, who was employed with respondent Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. Two children were born out of the wedlock, a son being 5 years' old and daughter, aged 2 years. Petitioner's husband was posted as Assistant (Finance) in the office of the respondent Corporation at Agra since 3.12.2007. It is claimed that on 19.3.2013, upon the direction of Senior Officers, the deceased employee left Agra for New Delhi, in connection with some official work, and while on duty, he fell sick. He was provided treatment at New Delhi, and upon return, was treated at Amit Jaggi Hospital, Agra. The employee concerned was then admitted to Apollo Hospital, New Delhi, where he received treatment upto 14.6.2013. While he was recovering from his sickness, he again fell seriously ill on 20.8.2013, and was taken to Apollo Hospital, New Delhi, where his condition deteriorated, and consequently, he died on 27.8.2013. Petitioner alleges that from 19th March, 2013, when petitioner's husband left for official tour in connection with performance of official duty, he would be treated to have remained on duty till he passed away on 27.8.2013. It is stated that from 19th March, 2013 till 27th August, 2013, petitioner's husband never reported for duty at his office on account of sickness. Petitioner claims that she is a young widow and has two minor children to take care of, and she requires compassionate appointment.
(3.) Petitioner's claim for grant of compassionate appointment appears to have been examined by the Corporation. Petitioner has been informed upon an information sought under the Right to Information Act, 2005 that her claim was considered, and since death of the employee had been caused due to illness, as such, in terms of the applicable policy, compassionate appointment cannot be granted. Subsequent representations made before various authorities have ultimately led to passing of the order dated 19th May, 2015, rejecting petitioner's claim. The order records that petitioner's husband was also offered compassionate appointment upon the death of his father late N.K. Goswami on the post of Assistant Grade-IV on 3.12.2007. It is then noticed that petitioner's husband died at Apollo Hospital on 27.8.2013 due to illness. It is stated in the order that under different heads, monetary benefits amounting to Rs.12,27,057/- has already been extended to the petitioner, and thereafter monthly pension of Rs.3,340/- as well as powergrid pension, widow and children pension, and EPS 95 scheme is also being provided. The amount of gratuity is awaiting succession certificate. In such circumstances, petitioner's claim for grant of compassionate appointment is not covered in terms of the applicable policy for grant of compassionate appointment, and consequently, petitioner's claim stands rejected. The subsequent order under challenge virtually reiterates the same averments.;