Jaswant Singh Vs. Raj. State Road Tran. Corpn. and ors - Court Judgment

Excerpt:

.....corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the corporation'), is claiming a direction for the respondents to employ him on compassionate grounds. the factual matrix necessary to be noticed is that on 17.5.2002 father of the petitioner shri sawai singh while holding the post of conductor with the respondent-corporation died on 17.5.2002. an application then was given by mother of the petitioner with the respondents to keep her right intact to get her minor son employed with the corporation on compassionate grounds on acquiring the minimum age prescribed for appointment. on 26.5.2010, an application was submitted by the petitioner for claiming appointment on compassionate grounds but that came to be rejected on 4.6.2010, being delayed. 2 the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the right to get employment on compassionate grounds was kept intact by his mother on 02.7.2012, therefore, the respondents should have not denied for the same. i do not find any merit in the argument advanced. appointments on compassionate grounds to the wards of deceased employees of rajasthan state road transport corporation are given as per the provisions of ! , 2010. the regulations.....

Judgment:

1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3551/2012 Jaswant Singh Vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Limited, & Ors. DATE OF ORDER :

21. 8.2012 HON'BLE MR. GOVIND MATHUR, J.

Mr. D.S. Sodha, for the petitioner. ... By this petition for writ, the petitioner, a ward of the deceased employee of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation'), is claiming a direction for the respondents to employ him on compassionate grounds. The factual matrix necessary to be noticed is that on 17.5.2002 father of the petitioner Shri Sawai Singh while holding the post of Conductor with the respondent-Corporation died on 17.5.2002. An application then was given by mother of the petitioner with the respondents to keep her right intact to get her minor son employed with the Corporation on compassionate grounds on acquiring the minimum age prescribed for appointment. On 26.5.2010, an application was submitted by the petitioner for claiming appointment on compassionate grounds but that came to be rejected on 4.6.2010, being delayed. 2 The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the right to get employment on compassionate grounds was kept intact by his mother on 02.7.2012, therefore, the respondents should have not denied for the same. I do not find any merit in the argument advanced. Appointments on compassionate grounds to the wards of deceased employees of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation are given as per the provisions of ! , 2010. The regulations aforesaid nowhere prescribes any authority with the Corporation to keep the claim for appointment on compassionate grounds intact for indefinite period. The maximum relaxation to condone delay in claiming appointment can be made to the extent of three years as per Clause 10. Merely on the count that the mother of the petitioner submitted an application on 02.7.2012 to keep the claim for appointment on compassionate grounds intact, no direction as prayed for can be granted. It is well settled that appointments on compassionate grounds are prescribed by the employers only to extend a hand of assistance to the family of their employee in the event of his untimely death. Harness existing at that time does not remain in currency with the same frequency and intensity for an indefinite 3 period, as such, I do not find any wrong with the decision of the respondents for not extending appointment to the petitioner on compassionate grounds. The petition for writ is dismissed accordingly. (GOVIND MATHUR) J.

Sanjay 4