Veerender Singh Siradhana, J. - (1.) AGGRIEVED of the order dated 13th June, 2003, whereby the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds has been declined, the petitioner has instituted the present writ application, praying for the following relief(s): "a) The entire record of compassionate appointments including the record of the petitioner may kindly be summoned from the respondents for kind perusal of the Hon'ble Court and after scrutiny of the same, appropriate orders or directions be passed in favour of the petitioner. b) The respondents be directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner sympathetically in view of the fact that the mother of the petitioner is a patient of Schezopheronia and his father was living separate from his mother since 1997. c) The impugned order dated 13.06.2003 (Annexure 3) passed by the respondent No. 2 may kindly be quashed and set aside and the respondents be directed to reconsider matter of compassionate appointment of the petitioner in the light of Rule 5 of the Rules of 1996, wherein it is provided that the Rules of 1996 may be relaxed in hard cases. d) The other order which the Hon'ble Court finds just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner."
(2.) BRIEFLY , the skeletal material facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy raised needs to be first noticed. It is pleaded case of the petitioner that his father late Shri Ram Saran Singh, died on 12th May, 2003, while working as Office -assistant with respondent No. 1 -Kota Open University. It is further pleaded that the mother of the petitioner though is in employment but she is a patient of Schizophrenia and the petitioner, therefore, resided with his father separately. The action of the respondent in declining appointment to the petitioner on compassionate grounds has been assailed for being illegal and arbitrary in the attending facts and circumstances of the case. The mother of the petitioner is residing separately on account of her disease since 1997. A representation addressed on 3rd December, 2003, evoked no response. The petitioner has claimed relaxation of the applicability of the Rule(s) of the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependants of Deceased Government Servant Rules, 1996 (for short, 'the Rules of 1996'), but his prayer was not acceded to, hence the writ proceedings. In response to the notice of the writ application, the respondents have filed their counter affidavit supporting their stand and action in declining appointment to the petitioner on compassionate grouns.
(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents reiterating the pleaded facts of the counter affidavit, asserted that the Rule 5 of the Rules of 1996, specifically stipulates a condition to the effect that under the Rules of 1996, employment shall not be admissible in cases where the spouse or at least one of the sons, unmarried daughters, adopted son/adopted unmarried daughter of the deceased Government servant, is already employed on regular basis under the Central/any State Government or Statutory Board, Organisation/Corporation owned or controlled wholly or partially by the Central/any State Government at the time of death of the Government servant.;