UNION OF INDIA Vs. B SUBRAMANYAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard Mr. Subhash Barot, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.

(2.) THIS petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the judgment and order dated 19.7.2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad in O.A. No.427 of 2011 with M.A. No.439 of 2011 whereby the Original Application filed by the respondent herein was allowed and the petitioners herein are directed to conduct an inquiry through personnel department about the dependency of the respondent on his brother and consider his case for compassionate appointment treating it as a hard case within a period of three months. The Tribunal also clarified that the benefits of letter dated 5.1.2001 issued by the Railway Board should be extended to the respondent irrespective of the gap between the deaths of the respondent's brother Late Shri Kannan.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the right accrued to the widow to claim appointment on compassionate ground, but since she did not claim appointment on compassionate ground, the younger brother of the deceased could not be provided compassionate appointment. He further submitted that the wife of the deceased could have claimed compassionate appointment and if she has not claimed compassionate appointment, the right comes to an end as per the policy of the Railways. In this regard, the petitioners have placed on record letter dated 30.1.2001 (at page 28 of the writ petition) which is extracted as under :-