Orissa High Court
Case Details
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 05-Nov-2024 18:48:14 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.16278 of 2018 (In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950). Soumyakanta Das …. Petitioner(s) -versus- State of Odisha and Ors. …. Opposite Party (s) Advocates appeared in the case through Hybrid Mode: For Petitioner(s) : For Opposite Party (s) :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. S.P. Jena, Adv. on behalf of Mr. S.B. Jena, Adv. Ms.Shradha Das, Adv. for O.Ps.2& 3 CORAM: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI DATE OF HEARING:-07.10.2024 DATE OF JUDGMENT:-29.10.2024 Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J. 1. In the present writ petition, the petitioner seeks a directive compelling the authorities to grant invalid pension, along with arrears dating from 22.07.2014, as well as interest and costs, to his legal heirs. I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE: 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: Page 1 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 05-Nov-2024 18:48:14 (i) The petitioner, after the death of his father, who worked as a Watchman, applied for a job under the Rehabilitation Assistance Rule, 1990, seeking a Diarist or any other Class-IV (Group-D) post. (ii) His father passed away on 16.11.2010, and the petitioner submitted his HSC certificate for educational qualification. (iii) A government order dated 31.12.2014 from the H&UD Department stated that vacancies in Group-B, Group-C, and Group-D (dying cadre) would be abolished, with no future appointments. (iv) On 13.01.2015, the Bhubaneswar Development Authority (BDA) implemented this order, stating no vacancies were available for the posts the petitioner applied for. (v) The petitioner, through the RTI Act, received information that seven Group-C posts were vacant, but his case was not considered due to under-qualification for the Diarist position, a Group-C post. (vi) The General Administration (G.A.) Department’s notification dated 26.07.2017 required strict adherence to vacancy availability and eligibility criteria for appointments under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme. The petitioner’s application was rejected on these grounds. (vii) Aggrieved by the rejection, the petitioner filed this writ petition, seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the opposite parties to appoint him to a Group-C or Group-D post, or for any other relief as deemed fit by the II. 3. court. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER: Learned counsel for the Petitioner earnestly made the following submissions in support of his contentions: Page 2 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 05-Nov-2024 18:48:14 (i) The petitioner submitted that despite the claim of the opposite party no. 3 that there were no vacancies, the RTI response revealed that 7 Group- C posts were lying vacant, which makes the rejection of his appointment unlawful and based on false information. (ii) He further submitted that the petitioner has passed the H.Sc examination and is eligible for appointment to a Group-C post. (iii) The petitioner contended that his family has been in financial distress since his father’s death/ and his appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme is necessary to alleviate this situation. (iv) He further contended that 8 years have passed since his father’s death/ yet no appointment has been made, which goes against the purpose of the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme designed to support families in distress. III. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES: 4. (i) The Learned Counsel for the Opposite Parties earnestly made the following submissions in support of his contentions: It is submitted that the petitioner is under-qualified for the Group-C post of Diarist, as he holds a matriculation certificate (HSc). Therefore, his application could not be considered under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme. (ii) He further submitted that, based on the 31.12.2014 government order, all Group-B, Group-C, and Group-D posts have been abolished from time to time due to retirement or death of employees, and no vacancies in these cadres are to be filled. This policy was implemented by the BDA on 13.01.2014. Page 3 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 05-Nov-2024 18:48:14 (iii) It is contended that as per the G.A. Department notification dated 26.07.2017, the appointments under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme must comply with eligibility criteria and vacancy status. Since the petitioner’s case does not meet these requirements/ his application was lawfully rejected. (iv) He further contended that the petitioner’s assertions hold no ground and it lacks merit. His claims about vacancies and his entitlements to a
Decision
post are untrue. Accordingly, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. IV. COURT’S REASONING AND ANALYSIS: 5. 6. Heard learned counsel for both parties and carefully examined the materials placed on record. At the outset, it is clear that vacancies existed for Group-C posts/ but the petitioner’s request for compassionate appointment was denied on grounds of educational inadequacy. It is pertinent to underscore that, compassionate appointments, though intended to provide relief to the families of deceased employees, cannot bypass the essential eligibility criteria prescribed for the relevant post. Courts cannot compel government authorities to make appointments that violate or bypass the provisions set by the applicable scheme. If the government chooses not to relax certain conditions, courts cannot interfere unless there is a gross violation of fundamental rights. 7. To this effect, the Madras High Court in the case of E. Ramasamy v. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board1upheld this principle and held that: 1 2007 LAB. I.C. 508. Page 4 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 05-Nov-2024 18:48:14 in the Scheme “16. It is, thus, clear that the courts cannot direct appointments on compassionate grounds de hors the provisions of force governed by rules/regulations/instructions. If in a given case, the department of the Government concerned declines, as a matter of policy, not to deviate from the mandate of the provisions underlying the Scheme and refuses to relax the stipulation in respect of ceiling fixed therein, the courts cannot compel the authorities to exercise its jurisdiction in a particular way and that too by relaxing the essential conditions, when no grievance of violation of substantial rights of parties could be held to have been provided, otherwise. The purpose of providing employment to a dependant of a government servant dying in harness in preference to anybody else is to mitigate the hardship caused to the family of the employee on account of his unexpected death while still in service. To alleviate the distress of the family, such appointments are permissible on compassionate grounds provided there are Rules providing for such appointment. None of these considerations can operate when the application is made after the death of the employee.” 8. Likewise, the Supreme Court in the case of State of Gujarat and Ors. v. Arvindkumar T. Tiwari2 while dealing with a similar issue rejected the plea of humanitarian grounds and held as under: “11. A person who does not possess the requisite qualification cannot even apply for recruitment for the reason that his appointment would be contrary to the statutory rules is, and would therefore, be void in law. Lacking eligibility for the post cannot be cured at any stage and appointing such a person would amount to serious illegibility and not mere irregularity.Such a person cannot approach the court for any relief for the reason that he does not have a right which can be enforced through court.” 22012 (9) SCC 545. Page 5 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 05-Nov-2024 18:48:14 9. Drawing parallels with the aforementioned judicial precedents, it becomes evident that meeting the minimum eligibility criteria is essential, even in Rehabilitation Assistance cases. The petitioner applied for the position of a Diarist, which falls under the Group-C category. However, as the petitioner possesses only a matriculation qualification, his application was not considered, given that he failed to meet the requisite educational standards for the position sought. Accordingly, as the Writ Petition lacks merit and is suitably dismissed. Interim order, if any, passed earlier stands vacated. 10. 11. (Dr.S.K. Panigrahi) Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated the 29th October, 2024/ Page 6 of 6