- (1.) IT is the case of the petitioner that her husband Jayant Lakra while was posted as a Constable in 112 Battalion of Border Security Force, in the Indo -Bangladesh Border Area of Dhubin (Assam), died of malaria on 25.3.2000. Thereupon the petitioner having a minor child started facing acute financial problem and, therefore, the petitioner did apply before the authority of the Border Security Force for giving appointment on compassionate ground. On such request being made by the petitioner, the authority of the Border Security Force forwarded the application of the petitioner before the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand for doing needful in the matter of compassionate appointment in terms of resolution as contained in memo no.5(48) 09/2003, Ranchi dated 15.6. 2004 (Annexure 3), wherein the policy decision has been taken for giving employment to the widow/dependents of the members of the armed forces like Border Security Force etc. who laid their lives for service of the nation and intimation to that effect was given to the petitioner but when no order in this regard was passed, the petitioner made representation before the Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, respondent no.2 but that also did not move the authority and therefore, this writ application was filed with a prayer to direct the respondent to give suitable employment to the petitioner on compassionate ground in terms of the resolution dated 15.6.2004 (Annexure 3).
(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that Government of Jharkhand under resolution as contained in memo no. 5(48) 09/2003, Ranchi dated 15.6. 2004 (Annexure 3) has taken a decision to give employment to the widow/dependents of the personnel of para -military forces, who laid down their lives while performing duties on the border or in combating terrorist activities and when the husband of the petitioner died, while he was posted as a constable of Border Security Force, the authority of Border Security Force made recommendation for giving appointment on compassionate ground to the petitioner as she was fulfilling all the criterias entitling her to be appointed in terms of the said resolution of the Government, but the respondent has not taken any decision in this respect. However, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no.3 wherein it has been stated that as the husband of the petitioner died of malaria on 25.3.2000, the petitioner is not entitled to be appointed on compassionate ground as the decision taken under aforesaid resolution is to be given effect to from 15.11.2000. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that since the decision under resolution (Annexure 3) has been taken for meeting the hardship being faced by the family by reason of the death of the bread earner, the provision of it may not be strictly adhered to rather it needs to be construed liberally and hence, the date, i.e, 15.11.2000 from when that resolution was made effective should also include the period during which application for compassionate appointment was pending and, therefore, the authority be directed to take decision in the matter of appointment of the petitioner. Admittedly, Government of Jharkhand has taken a policy decision under resolution as contained in Annexure 3 whereby widow/ dependents of the members of the armed forces, who have laid their lives for the nation while performing duties on the border or in combating terrorist activities, is to be given appointment on compassionate ground on fulfilling the other criteria and the said decision is to be given effect to from 15.11.2000 whereas the husband of the petitioner died on 25.3.2000 before such decision was taken by the Sate of Jharkhand and as such, the petitioner will have no right to claim appointment on compassionate ground as it has been well settled that respondent is required to consider the request for compassionate appointment only in accordance with the scheme framed by it and no discretion as such is left with any of the authority to make compassionate appointment dehors the scheme. The claim of compassionate appointment and the right, if any, is traceable only to the scheme, executive instructions, rules, etc framed by the employer in the matter of providing employment on compassionate grounds. There is no right of whatsoever nature to claim compassionate appointment on any ground other than the one, if any, conferred by the employer by way of scheme or instructions as the case may be. The aforesaid proposition of law has been laid down by the Honble Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of India vs. Somvir Singh [(2007) 4 SCC 778] . In view of he settled law, the petitioner is not entitled to relief as claimed. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. ;