Full Judgment
S.N. Srivastava, J.
1. By means of the present petition the petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondents to offer appointment on the post of clerk in the department.
2. The facts forming background to the present petition are that Satpal Singh, father of the petitioner who was serving as clerk in the Distribution Division at Baghpat died-in-harness on 31.12.1993. The petitioner being minor at the relevant time and the widow who according to the allegations in the writ petition was shockingly unaware of the consequences could apply for compassionate appointment after lapse of a span of six years and the said application was acted upon by the General Manager, U.P. Power Corporation, Meerut Region, Meerut who commended the case for compassionate appointment to the Head Office the quintessence of which was that though the application had been made after a lapse of six years beyond the time limit prescribed in the Dying-in-Harness Rules, yet in peculiar circumstances the rigours of five years should be relaxed and approval for appointment may be communicated to his office. It would further appear that the petitioner received communication dated 16.4.2003 by which it was intimated that his application forwarded to the Head Office, had been received back without any orders thereon. It is in this background that the petitioner has preferred the instant petition for the relief aforestated.
3. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record. The learned Counsel for the petitioner in connection with his proposition has drawn attention to Regulation 5 of the relevant Regulations which envisages time-limit of five years for moving of application for availing of the relief under the Dying-in-Harness Rules. The learned Counsel has made a particular reference to proviso to Regulation 5 which envisages as under:
'Provided that where the Board is satisfied that the time limit fixed for making the application for employment causes undue hardship in any particular case, it may dispense with or relax the requirement as it may consider necessary for dealing with the case in just and equitable manner.'
After referring to the aforestated proviso, the learned Counsel dwelt upon the miserable condition of the deceased family depicting a dismal picture that the family suffered under financial straits so much so that the elder brother of the petitioner succumbed to his ailment for want of proper medical assistance and that the family is nearly on the verge of famishing for want of resources.
4. In the above conspectus it appears that the prayer of the petitioner has not been considered having regard to the proviso, which envisages that time-limit may be dispensed with in case it is fraught with undue hardship in any particular case. It wouldappear that the General Manager, Meerut Region, Meerut considering the case in all its pros and cons commended the matter to the Head Office ostensibly making out a case that it was a fit case for relaxation of requirements. It is, therefore, explicit that the Head Office dealt with the matter superficially and has not delved deep into the matter in the light of the proviso. Non-application of mind is further borne out from the fact that no order has been passed on the application forwarded by the General Manager attended with his recommendation and the application has been sent back to the end of the General Manager, Meerut Region, Meerut without any action. I am of the view that the matter should not have been relegated without action and the authority being an authority within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India was under a duty to pass orders and indicated reasons for accepting or rejecting the claim for compassionate appointment and in case of rejection what weighed with it to be in disagreement with the recommendation of the General Manager, Meerut Region, Meerut. The inaction on the part of the Competent Authority in the matter cannot be viewed with equanimity. In the perspective of facts available on record and regard being had to the recommendations made by the Appointing Authority to the Headquarter for condonation of delay, I am pursuaded to the view that the petitioner has fully explained the causative factors leading to the delay in moving application for compassionate appointment and in the circumstance, the application for compassionate appointment shall be treated to have been made within the time-limit and the prayer of the petitioner for compassionate appointment shall be considered on its merit by the Respondent No. 2 accordingly.
5. In the result, the petition succeeds and is allowed and the matter is remitted to the Competent Authority clothed with the power of appointment in the respondent department attended with the direction to consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders treating the application as having been filed within the time-limit. It needs hardly be said that the authority shall reckon into consideration the financial aspects and hardship and pass the. orders within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order and communicate to the petitioner the decision so taken immediately thereafter.