Union of India & Ors. Vs. K.P. Tiwari
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal Nos. 6238-6239/1997
Petitioner: Union of India & Ors.
Respondent: K.P. Tiwari
Apeal: Civil Appeal Nos. 6238-6239/1997
Judges: S.RAJENDRA BABU & DORAISWAMY RAJU, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jun 09, 2001
Head Note:
SERVICE LAWS
Constitution
Articles 226, 21, 14 – Appointment – Compassionate ground – Employee dying in harness – Brother employed somewhere else and living separately – Tribunal directing appointment – During pendency of SLP, appointment given subject to result of appeals – More than 5 years passed. Held that it is unnecessary to examine the question of law or fact. It is not appropriate to disturb the state of affair and uprooting the respondent from his livelihood. Appeal dismissed. (Paras 2 to 4)
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
1. The respondent applied for employment with the appellants on compassionate ground on the grounds that his father died in harness and his family was in dire circumstances. He also indicated that his elder brother, who is an employee of the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board is residing separately and has his own family. However, the appellants having rejected the application made by the respondent, the matter was carried to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur.
2. The Tribunal in the first instance merely directed to consider the case of the respondent afresh for appointment on compassionate grounds in relaxation of the educational qualification on merits and the matter was disposed of. Thereafter, the said order was reviewed by another application when the various circumstances of the death of the father of the respondent, brother being in employment and living separately not supporting the family of the respondent, were considered and the matter had been pending consideration for a long time and in view of the special circumstances directed that the respondent be provided with an employment within one month from the date of the receipt of the order.
3. During the pendency of these proceedings by an order made on 1.10.1996, the respondent has already been provided with an employment subject to the result of these appeals.
4. It is unnecessary in this case to examine either question of law or fact arising in the matter. Suffice to say that the respondent has been appointed now and has been in service for more than five years. We do not think, it would be appropriate to disturb that state of affairs by making any other order resulting in uprooting the respondent from his livelihood.
5. In that view of the matter, we decline to interfere with the order made by the High Court. The appeals are accordingly dismissed.
1. The respondent applied for employment with the appellants on compassionate ground on the grounds that his father died in harness and his family was in dire circumstances. He also indicated that his elder brother, who is an employee of the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board is residing separately and has his own family. However, the appellants having rejected the application made by the respondent, the matter was carried to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur.
2. The Tribunal in the first instance merely directed to consider the case of the respondent afresh for appointment on compassionate grounds in relaxation of the educational qualification on merits and the matter was disposed of. Thereafter, the said order was reviewed by another application when the various circumstances of the death of the father of the respondent, brother being in employment and living separately not supporting the family of the respondent, were considered and the matter had been pending consideration for a long time and in view of the special circumstances directed that the respondent be provided with an employment within one month from the date of the receipt of the order.
3. During the pendency of these proceedings by an order made on 1.10.1996, the respondent has already been provided with an employment subject to the result of these appeals.
4. It is unnecessary in this case to examine either question of law or fact arising in the matter. Suffice to say that the respondent has been appointed now and has been in service for more than five years. We do not think, it would be appropriate to disturb that state of affairs by making any other order resulting in uprooting the respondent from his livelihood.
5. In that view of the matter, we decline to interfere with the order made by the High Court. The appeals are accordingly dismissed.
