My father was employed with the Indian Army in MES for GE Engineers for last 30 years. On July 2005 he expired and because of that I have applied for a job on compassionate grounds for the same but unfortunately during the same time my mother was hospitalized and underwent a major operation as her 7 vertebra from her backbone were removed and replaced with titanium rod.
At that time of the event I was unemployed and had completed my master’s degree in Computer Application but when the job on compassionate grounds was given to me in 2009 it was a MAZDOOR job which I rejected as that job profile did not matched my education qualification and at that time I knew no one in my father’s office to pursue the case as he was transferred to Kolkata few year back only.
So my question is:
1. Can I pursue the case after 3 years? 2. I am still eligible for a job? 3. If yes, then what is the procedure to follow to re-open the case?
23 September 2012
SCHEME FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENTS
The compassionate appointments in the Army are considered in terms of policy framed by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension (Department of Personnel and Training) OM No.14014/6/94-Estt(D) dated 09 Oct 98 (as amended from time to time).
2. Salient Features of the Scheme. The object of the Scheme for Compassionate Appointment formulated by the DOP&T, referred to above, is to grant appointment on compassionate ground to a member of the dependent family (spouse, son, daughter, brother or sister) of a Government employee dying in harness or who takes retirement on medical grounds, thereby leaving his family in penury and without any means of livelihood, to relieve the family of the Government employee concerned from financial destitution and to help it get over the emergency. The scheme for compassionate appointment provides for compassionate appointments in Group ‘C’ and ‘D’ posts to the extent of 5% of the vacancies to be filled by direct recruitment in Group ‘C’ and ‘D’ posts. Further, the compassionate appointment is to be granted only in most deserving cases to save the dependent family of a deceased/medically retired Government employee from financial destitution. The Scheme also provides that if compassionate appointment to genuine and deserving cases is not possible in the first year, due to non-availability of regular vacancy, the prescribed committee may review such cases to evaluate the financial conditions of the family to arrive at a decision as to whether a particular case warrants extension by one more year, for consideration for compassionate appointment by the committee, subject to availability of a clear vacancy within the prescribed 5% quota. If on scrutiny by the Committee a case is considered to be deserving, the name of such a person can be continued for consideration for one more year. The maximum time a person’s name can be kept under consideration for offering compassionate appointment is three years, subject to the condition that the prescribed Committee has reviewed and certified the penurious condition of the applicant at the end of the first and the second year. After three years, if compassionate appointment is not possible to be offered to the application, his case will be finally closed and will not be considered again. Appointments on compassionate grounds can be made only if a vacancy is available for that purpose, as per decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Himachal Road Transport Corporation vs. Dinesh Kumar [JT 1996 (5) S.C. 319] on May 7, 1996 and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited vs. Smt A. Radhika Thirumalai [JT 1996 (9) S.C. 197] on October 9, 1996. Further, as per instructions contained in Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension (Department of Personnel and Training) OM No. 2/8/2001 – PIC dated 16 May 2001, the vacancies finally cleared by the Screening Committee held under the Annual Direct Recruitment Plan (ADRP) Scheme will be filled up duly applying the rules for reservations, handicapped, compassionate quotas thereon. Also, vide DOP&T OM No 14014/18/2000-Estt(D) dated 22 Jun 2001, the Committee constituted for considering applications for compassionate appointments is to take into account the position regarding availability of vacancy for such appointment and it should limit its recommendation to appointment only if vacancy meant for appointment on compassionate grounds will be available within a year in the concerned office that too within the ceiling of 5% of vacancies falling in DR quota in any Group C or D posts. 3. Procedure for Compassionate appointment. Under the existing system, dependents are required to submit applications for compassionate appointments to the concerned Army Units/Estt of the deceased Govt employees. The Unit/Estt concerned will forward the same with their recommendation through the Record Offices concerned to the Line Dtes at Army HQ for consideration by the Quarterly Board concerned for the purpose. MP-4(Civ) has no role to play in this process.
23 September 2012
as per guidelines The maximum time a person’s name can be kept under consideration for offering compassionate appointment is three years,
in your case you were offered compassionate appointment but you rejected the same . furhter the committee has to be satisfied that your family is in apenerious condion . in your case you have rejected the offer . you cnat be considered now
23 September 2012
It is a matter of surprise that inspite of applying after 4 years of death you were offered the post of a mazdoor and nobody challenged it. It was an act of generosity to consider belated case.
I do not understand how you can be advised to go to court when job is offered and declined. Per-se there is no sustainable grievance.
Compassionate job is meant to meet immediate bread requirement of the family of the deceased. It is not a undated cheque or buried treasure which can be redeemed at any stage.
Further the job to be offered cannot be based on qualification of the candidate. In case the candidate is above matric (temporary relaxation for two possible for student of matric) he can be taken as LDC subject to qualifying typing test and subject to availability of vacancy otherwise any Gp C&D post as has been done in your case and you on your own felt not like accepting the same.
I will politely but strongly disagree with those leaned experts who advise you to move to high court. First of all the matter is of CAT jurisdiction secondly the job stands offered to you and your declined and thirdly you did not move to CAT within one year with whatever (right or wrong)grievance you had. In my view it is waste of time and money whereas a well qualified person like you can otherwise has a good chance of getting a better future.
With good wishes for a good career outside, the reply to all your three questions is "No".
24 September 2012
24 September 2012
One of the cases that I myself argued for the petitioner close to 4 years back in the HC, had similar facts. The HC directed the employer to consider the case for compassionate appointment even though the writ was filed belatedly and the petitioner was not receptive to the offer that was made earlier to him as he was of the opinion that the job offered to him did not commensurate to his educational qualifications.
One might contend that it was a wrong decision, and I rank amongst those who call it wrong. However, with due respect to those who strike a strong disagreement with me, in my humble opinion a wrong judicial pronouncement is a good law unless it is declared wrong by the higher court in appeal. In my case, no appeal was made. I leave it here.
24 September 2012
Nice to know the experice of Mr Devessar. Pleasure to hear for success in the said futile case. really some persons can argue well.
But in this case candidate is qualified as MCA. Otherwise he has a bright future better than he could expect in compassionate appointment.
It may not be fair to advise him to pledge his entire energy (off course ignoring his professional growth) only to hope to get a post higher than mazdoor (L.D.C.). Job commnesurate to his qualification may not be Gp-C&D. it may be a higher post on which compassionate appointment cannot be made.