IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15157 of 2008 ***** Sarswati Devi, W/o Late Mahibeer Prasad, Ex-fireman, resident of Danapur Contentment, District Patna. …. …. Petitioner Versus 1. Union of India through the General Manager, East-Central- Railway, Hajipur, District Vaishali. 2. Chief Personal Officer, East-Central-Railway, Fairlie Palace, Kolkata. 3. Divisional Railway Manager, East-Central-Railway, Danapur. …. …. Respondent ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Behzad Akhtar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Mahesh Prasad, Advocate ----------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ----------- Dated, the 21st November, 2008. Sarswati Devi filed an original application before the Central Administrative Tribunal raising the grievance that employment to her on compassionate ground, on pre-mature retirement of her husband on medical unfitness, has wrongly been denied. The original application was contested by the Railway authorities and it was submitted on their behalf that applicant’s son Krishna Kumar has been appointed on compassionate ground by the Railways and that he is in their service and, therefore, applicant’s claim for appointment on compassionate ground was untenable. 2. The Tribunal considered the submissions of the parties and held that Krishna Kumar (applicant’s son) was already appointed on compassionate ground and, therefore, her claim had no - 2 - merit. 3. Challenging the order of the Tribunal, the counsel for the petitioner submits, that the appointment of Krishna Kumar was not on compassionate ground but he was appointed as a substitute and, therefore, Tribunal erred in holding that petitioner’s son was appointed on compassionate ground. 4. Firstly, we are of the view that there is nothing on record, which may persuade us to take a view different from that of the Tribunal that Krishna Kumar was not appointed on compassionate ground. Secondly, and more importantly, even if we assume that Krishna Kumar was not appointed on compassionate ground but the fact of the matter is that he is a confirmed employee working in the Railways. The petitioner has no dependant. Her daughter is married. If there is any family dispute between the petitioner and her son Krishna Kumar, that would not entitle her for appointment on compassionate ground as she cannot be held to meet the prescribed norms for such appointment. 5. The order of the Tribunal, therefore, cannot be legally flawed. Writ petition has not merit. It is dismissed in limine. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J Pawan/-