Review of compassionate appointment cases regarding.
No. 19(4)/2015/D(Lab)
Government of India
Ministry of Defence
New Delhi, the 30.4.2015.
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
The undersigned is directed to invite attention to this Ministry’s OM No.19(3)/2013/D(Lab) dated 18.11.2014 vide which all administrative/authorities were requested to strictly comply the instructions contained in Para 8 of DoP&T OM No. 14014/02/2012-Estt(D) dated 16.1.2013 regarding withdrawal of three years time limit and Sl.No. 38-43 of FAQ issued vide DoP&T OM No. 14014/02/2012-Estt(D) dated 30.5.2013.
2. An issue has been raised by Bhartiya Pratiraksha Mazdoor Sangh (BPMS) informing that the Line Directorates/Units of Army HQrs are not considering the compassionate appointment cases in true spirit of the guidelines issued by DoP&T and the requests for compassionate appointment are being rejected on the plea that as per policy once three consecutive chances had been considered, the Case is considered to be closed and cannot be opened.
3. As per the new guidelines on compassionate appointment, any application for compassionate appointment is to be considered without any time limit and decision taken on merit in each case.
4. Regarding re-opening of old cases which were closed on completion of three years time limit as per the earlier policy of DoP&T, it may be noted that the DoP&T vide their OM dated 30.5.2013 have clarified that the closed cases can be reopened provided tat the cases were closed due to non-availability of vacancies during the 3 year time period. However these cases may be considered as per the criteria mentioned in Sl.No. 32 & 39 of FAQ dated 30.5.2013. Such cases should not be opened merely because the time limit has been waived off. In this regard DoP&T have further clarified that the cases which have been closed for not being found suitable under the criteria for compassionate appointments, need not to be opened irrespective of the waiver of time limit.
5. In view of the above, all the Service HQrs / lower formations are requested to follow the DoP&T’s above guidelines in letter and spirit. They may not reject any application for compassionate appointment simply on the ground that it had already been considered thrice unless it was rejected due to lack of merit/not found suitable under the criteria for compassionate appointments. If the compassionate appointment could not be granted due to non-availability of vacancies at that time, any fresh application, received now should be re-considered after adjudging his penurious condition on the basis of the family’s latest financial/economic condition, number of dependents of the family as on date, latest marital status of dependents etc in the light of the existing guidelines of DoP&T on the subject.
sd/-
(Biswajit Guha)
Under Secretary(Lab)
| |
Showing posts with label Compassionate Appointment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Compassionate Appointment. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
Review of compassionate appointment cases regarding.
Marriage of daughter not a bar in being considered for govt. job on compassionate grounds after the death of her father while in service: Madras High Court
Marriage of daughter not a bar in being considered for govt. job on compassionate grounds after the death of her father while in service: Madras High Court
Affirming a Single Judge’s ruling that that marriage alone need not necessarily disentitle a woman from claiming a Government job, as marriage is not a disqualification, a Division Bench of the Madras High Court has held that married daughter of a government employee is entitled to be considered for the job on compassionate grounds after the death of her father while in service subject to her fulfilling two requirements : one, she must obtain a no-objection certificate from other siblings and; two, she and her husband must give an undertaking that she will take care of other members of her parents’ family from her salary.
“A married daughter is eligible for consideration, subject to submission of no-objection certificate of other members of the deceased’s family and also with an undertaking from her and her husband that she will take care of other members of the parents’ family,” said a division bench of the Court comprising of Justice Satish K Agnihotri and Justice M Venugopal recently, while dealing with a case of one Kayalvizhi whose father V Indarjith died while in service in the education department under the State Government.
Kayalvizhi, who was the only daughter of Indarjith and happened to be married by the time he died in harness, then applied for appointment on compassionate grounds. When she was denied appointment, she approached the High court seeking reliefs. Citing a government order governing the issue, a single judge of the Madras High Court said she was entitled to be considered for the job. Her marriage alone need not necessarily disentitle her from claiming the job, as marriage is not a disqualification, the judge said.
Assailing the order of the learned Single Judge, the Assistant Primary Education Officer in Anthiyur in Erode district had gone in appeal before the Division Bench.
Ruling in favour of Kayalvizhi, the Division Bench relied on an earlier judgment of the Court in Kamatchi v. state of Tamil Nadu, wherein it had been held that even if there are other members in the family, the beneficiary could take a no-objection from them and stake her/his claim for appointment under compassionate grounds, and the GO issued by the State Government, which on its part, clearly said an NOC from the remaining members of the family, an undertaking from the beneficiary that he/she shall be helpful to her/his parents’ family and an assurance from the spouse of the beneficiary that he/she shall not cause hindrance to her/him in helping members of his/her parents’ family in future, should be fulfilled to become eligible for appointment.
The Division Bench upheld Kayalvizhi’s rights in this regard subject to her producing a NOC from members in her paternal family and an undertaking from her husband, and directed the authorities to consider her case for appointment within a period of four weeks.
Source:http://www.livelaw.in/  | |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)