Ashish Kalia ORDER
Ashish Kalia, Member (J)
1. The applicant claimed relief as under:
"1) To call for the records leading to Annexure A3 and may be pleased to set aside the same on the ground that it is illegal, in the interest of justice,
2) To direct the respondents to consider the applicant's claim for appointment under the compassionate grounds, afresh, adverting to Annexure A5 revised scheme as expeditiously as possible, within such time as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the interest of justice,
3) To pass any such or further orders as the applicant may seek and this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit to grant."
2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant is the daughter of Late Unnikrishnan K, who died in harness while working as Telecom Mechanic on 11.1.2012. The mother of the applicant Radhadevi expired on 16.9.2010. The deceased was survived by one daughter, one son and Radhadevi's sister who is unmarried and mentally retarded. Applicant got married on 22.8.2016. On account of marriage she had to take personal loans from private persons to meet the expenses of marriage. Since the family of the deceased was virtually thrown into the plaint of destitution, the applicant applied for employment under the scheme for employment of dependents of Government servants dying while in service. The application of the applicant was considered by the Circle High Power Committee and the same was rejected by order Annexure A2. The applicant submits that the committee considered the application applying the system of weightage point system and found that the applicant is entitled to obtain only 27 points as against the minimum of 55 or above points which is considered for grant of appointment. The respondents while rejecting the application of the applicant had not applied the provisions of the revised scheme which was in force. Therefore, the action of the respondents is arbitrary and illegal. Aggrieved the applicant has approached this Tribunal with the present OA.
3. Notices were issued to the respondents. They have entered appearance through Shri V. Santharam, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. It is contended by respondents that the object of the scheme is to grant appointment on compassionate grounds to a dependent family member of a Government servant dying in harness or who is retired on medical grounds thereby leaving his family in penury and without any means of livelihood and to relieve the family of the Government servant concerned from financial destitution and help to get over the emergency. As per the rules, provision of appointment under the scheme is limited to 5% of vacancies falling under direct recruitment quota in any Group C or D post and as such while considering a compassionate appointment request, a balanced and objective assessment of the financial condition of the family has to be made taking into account its assets and liabilities, presence of earning member, size of the family, age of the children and all other relevant factors of the case, especially in view of the fact that in number of occasions the Hon'ble apex court has pronounced that granting of appointment on compassionate grounds without assessing the financial position of the family is impermissible. The deceased official was survived by his daughter (applicant) and a son at the time of submission of the application. Terminal benefits amounting to Rs. 6,51,890/- were paid to the family of the deceased official in addition to a monthly family pension of Rs. 7,775/- plus DA. The application of the applicant was placed before the Circle High Power Committee in its meeting held on 29.3.2017. It examined all aspects of the case in accordance with the weightage point system for compassionate grounds appointment in BSNL. In the instant case the net points came to be only 27 and hence the application was rejected. The respondents submit that the contention of the applicant that she is eligible for 20 points as per the new scheme is misleading. Respondents pray for dismissing the OA.
4. Heard Shri Sreekumar G. Chellur, learned counsel appearing for the applicant and Mr. V. Santharam, learned counsel appearing for the responde........