SUDHIR AGARWAL,J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Sudhanshu Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri N.P. Singh representing the respondents.
(2.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 15/21.10.2008 (Annexure 8 to the writ petition), whereby his claim for compassionate appointment has been rejected by the Assistant General Manager Food Corporation of India, Zonal Office (North) Noida. It is said that the petitioner's mother Smt. Chandrawati Devi died on 20.10.2004 while in service with the respondents and was working on the post of Stitcher at Gorakhpur. The petitioner being eligible sought compassionate appointment submitting an application on 8.6.2005 which was considered by the respondents but on account of lack of vacancy meant for compassionate appointment he could not be offered any compassionate appointment and his name was entered in the roster of compassionate appointee claims. However, no further vacancy could be available in the next one year also. Under the Instruction dated 5.5.2003 the claim for compassionate appointment can continue for consideration for a period of three years only and thereafter, it has to be dropped. The respondent did not find any vacancy for compassionate appointment of the petitioner within three years, so his case can not be considered thereafter.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that even at present there are 19 vacancies in the respondents' office and therefore, he can be considered against one of such vacancies. However, he could not dispute that under the Instructions dated 5.5.2003 providing scheme of compassionate appointment, the claim of the petitioner can be considered within a period of three years from the date of death and not beyond that. It is well settled that the matter of compassionate appointment is strictly covered by the scheme and if under the scheme a compassionate appointment can not be provided after a particular period, no mandamus can be issued to the employer to consider the claim of compassionate appointment.;