IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2008 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1930 OP.No. 5806 of 2001(N) -------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- PRADEEP.K, S/O. LATE HAV. KRISHNAN KUTTY, NO. 2552355, R/O. PRADHIBALAYAM, THULAM PARAMBU NORTH, HARIPAD.P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS J.NEDUMPARA, ADV. SRI.BIMAL K.NATH. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, SOUTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 110 011. 2. THE ADJUTANT GENERAL, ARMY HEAD QUARTERS, DHQ .P.O., NEW DELHI-110011. 3. THE OFFICER IN CHARGE (RECORDS), THE DEFENCE SECURITY CORPS, MILL ROAD, KANNUR - 670 013, (KERALA). BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST. S.G, ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON C.M.P. NO. 9606/2001 IN O.P. NO. 5806/2001-N DISMISSED 25/03/2008. SD/- T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 27/01/1997 ADVISING THE PETITIONER TO PUT FORWARD ALL DOCUMENTS FOR CONSIDERING HIS CASE UNDER DYING IN HARNESS SCHEME. EXT.P.2: COMMUNICATION DTD. 14/08/97 ADDRESSED TO THE OFFICER INCHARGE, RECORDS BY THE ZILA SAINIK OFFICER FORWARDING THE DOCUMENTS OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE APPLICATION FORM WHICH THE PETITIONER SUBMITTED FOR EMPLOYMENT UNDER DYING IN HARNESS SCHEME DTD. 04/08/97. EXT.P.4: COMMUNICATION DTD. 08/12/1998 ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER'S MOTHER BY THE RECORD OFFICER STATING THAT THE PETITIONER'S CLAIM IS WAIT LISTED. EXT.P.5: COMMUNICATION DTD. 20/10/2000 ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE RECORD OFFICER STATING THAT HIS NAME STANDS DELETED FROM THE WAITING LIST. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURE: ANNEXURE R1: COPY OF THE LETTER NO. 15316/MP-4 (CIV) (A) DTD. 26 JUNE/JULY,2000. //TRUE COPY// prv. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ======================= O.P.No.5806 of 2001-N. ======================= Dated this the 25th day of March, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is seeking the benefit of compassionate appointment in the Army Service. His father was a Havildar in the Defence Security Corps, who died on 26.10.1993. He had served the Ministry of Defence for a period of 31 years. 2. Apart from the petitioner, the other legal heirs are his mother and a sister. In response to the application for compassionate appointment, by Ext.P1 the petitioner forwarded all necessary documents to the Secretary, Zilla Sainik Board. Even though the formalities were completed, the appointment did not fructify. Ultimately as per Ext.P5 it was informed that since no vacancy arose within a period of one year the petitioner's name O.P.No.5806 of 2001-N. -: 2 :- was deleted from the waiting list. The same is under challenge in this writ petition. 3. The respondents have filed the counter affidavit explaining the scheme itself. It is stated that the death rate in the Defence Security Corps is higher than other Corps and due to non availability of sufficient reserved job vacancy it was found not possible to accommodate all dependants of persons dying in harness. Only 5% of the vacancies have been reserved for providing employment to dependants of Government employees. The petitioner's name was registered in the waiting list as Sl.No.308 on 20.1.1998 for a Group 'C' post. But no vacancy arose in the near future. Since the aim to provide employment is to help the family in distress, as no vacancy arose within a reasonable time the registration has been cancelled. Reliance is placed on the decision reported in Himachal Road Transport Corporation v. Dinesh Kumar (JT 1996 (5) SC 319) to contend that appointment on compassionate ground can be made only if a vacancy is O.P.No.5806 of 2001-N. -: 3 :- available for that purpose. It is also contended that such appointments cannot be granted after a long lapse of time. In para.2 of the counter affidavit the details of post death benefits released to the family in addition to the family pension are also given to contend that the family is not in absolute distress. 4. It is well settled by the decisions of the Apex Court and of this Court that the claim for appointment on compassionate grounds will not confer a right of inheritance as such on the claimants. The object of the said scheme is to provide immediate assistance to the family of the deceased if they are living in utter penury. Herein the death occurred in the year 1993. The respondents actually granted registration to the petitioner to provide employment assistance and waited for a reasonable time for the vacancy to arose. But within that period no vacancy arose to accommodate the petitioner who is Sl.No.308 in the waiting list. Therefore, it cannot be disputed that the view taken in Ext.P5 is reasonable. The family has survived for long and the O.P.No.5806 of 2001-N. -: 4 :- respondents have provided various benefits also to the family. In that view of the matter also Ext.P5 cannot be faulted. Therefore the writ petition is dismissed. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. kvs/-