- (1.) With the consent of the parties, hearing of this matter has been done through video conferencing. They have no complaint about any audio and visual connectivity.
(2.) This instant intra-court appeal is directed against the order/judgment dated 08.07.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No.5212 of 2018 by which the decision taken by the District Compassionate Appointment Committee on 17.05.2018, rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner for his appointment on compassionate ground, has been refused to be interfered with.
(3.) The brief facts of the case, which require to be referred herein, read hereunder as: The father of the writ petitioner-appellant, late Ramchandra Mahto, was working as peon (Padchar) in the office of Commercial Taxes, Giridih and while he was in service died in harness on 15.03.2004. The writ petitioner-appellant being the elder and only major son of the deceased employee, had applied for his appointment on compassionate ground in the prescribed format along with all the relevant documents on 06.08.2004. The application of the writ petitioner-appellant was placed before the District Establishment Appointment Committee, Giridih, who took decision on 30.11.2005 by calling upon a report from the District Superintendent of Education, Giridih with regard to the V11th class pass certificate as submitted by the writ petitioner, but the District Superintendent of Education, Giridih had not sent any report and ultimately, the report had come on 22.12.2006 stating therein that the educational qualification certificate submitted by the writ petitioner is doubtful. The Committee after considering the report of District Superintendent of Education decided for V11th pass certificate from the writ petitioner so that the Committee could consider about the relaxation in the educational qualification for appointment of the writ petitioner on compassionate ground. In pursuance to the aforesaid decision, the writ petitioner had submitted his V11th pass certificate in the year 2007 and thereafter, the Committee in its meeting dated 05.12.2007 has decided that since the writ petitioner had submitted V11th pass certificate and the power for relaxation of educational qualification is vested only with the Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Raj Bhasa Department, the decision was taken to refer the matter before the Personnel, Administrative Reform and Raj Bhasa Department. The department of Personnel, Administrative Reform and Raj Bhasa Department had not approved the proposal of granting relaxation in education qualification and, therefore, the Assistant Commissioner, Department of Commercial Taxes vide his memo dated 02.07.2012, rejected the application of the petitioner. It is the grievance of the writ petitioner that the decision dated 02.07.2012 was never been communicated to the writ petitioner, even though several representations were made in between the year 2013, 2015 and 2016. Ultimately, the writ petitioner resorted to the Right to Information Act and after that he came to know about rejection of his application. The writ petitioner, thereafter, again approached to the District Compassionate Appointment Committee, wherein direction was issued to the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department vide its letter dated 18.07.2017 to reproduce all the relevant documents with recommendation, upon receiving the said letter, the Deputy Commissioner asked the writ petitioner to fill up fresh application, for which, his case was not considered for appointment, although the writ petitioner objected the same but having no option he submitted fresh application on 16.08.2017 with protest. The application submitted afresh on 16.08.2017 had been rejected as time barred since the same was submitted after lapse of 13 years, while as per the rule, the application for appointment on compassionate ground has to be submitted within five years from the dated of death of the employee. The writ petitioner being aggrieved with the said decision approached to this Court by filing writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 5212 of 2018 but the learned Single Judge of this Court, has refused to interfere with the impugned decision on the ground that there is already delay of 14 years and when the family of the deceased employee has survived for more than 14 years, therefore, no compassion is left in the case of the writ petitioner-appellant. ;