IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2011 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1933 OP (CAT).No. 941 of 2011(S) ----------------------------------------- OA.860/2010 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER: -------------------- DIVYA CHANDRAN, SREYAS, PALACE WARD, PUZHAVATHU, CHANGANACHERY, PATHANAMTHITTA DT. BY ADV. SRI.THAMPAN THOMAS, SRI.B.V.JOY SANKER. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER TELECOM, KERALA CIRCLE, TRIVANDRUM-695 033. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, BSNL, THIRUVALLA-686 112. 3. THE SUB DIVISIONAL ENGINEER (HRD), TELECOM, THIRUVALLA-686 112. BY ADV. SMT.I.SHEELA DEVI, SC, BSNL . THIS OP (CAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= O.P.(CAT) No.941 of 2011 =~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~= Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. Petitioner's father died in harness while he was working as Senior Telecom Office Assistant in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (respondent No.1 herein). Petitioner approached respondent No.1 seeking appointment under the Dying in Harness Scheme. The said request was turned down. The petitioner, therefore, approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench praying for a direction to respondent No.1 to consider her request afresh and give her employment under the Scheme. The Tribunal, after considering the rival contentions of the parties, dismissed the Original Application. Hence, this Original Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. It is beyond controversy that petitioner's father died in harness and that the petitioner who is the youngest OP (CAT) No.941/2011 2 daughter is a dependent on the family for the time being. It is also beyond controversy that the petitioner is still unmarried and is living under the care and protection of her mother. 3. However it is on record that petitioner's mother (widow of the deceased employee) is working in a Co- operative Bank drawing a monthly salary of nearly Rs.25,000/- + D.A. Still further the family is getting more than Rs.5,000/- towards Family Pension in addition to D.A. More over the family had received terminal benefits amounting to Rs.7,86,097/-. 4. It is pointed out by the learned standing counsel for the respondents that the petitioner is a B.Tech Degree holder and that the category of post earmarked under the Compassionate Appointment Scheme is only Group-C and Group-D posts. 5. Going by the qualification of the petitioner, the post that will be available may not be attractive at all. Still further, after considering the various parameters as OP (CAT) No.941/2011 3 envisaged under the Scheme in force, the authority concerned found that the petitioner would not be entitled to get the benefit of the Scheme which is mainly intended for the benefit of those families which are living in penury or in indigent conditions. The Scheme has been introduced in order to help such families to tide over the immediate crisis that may arise due to the sudden and unexpected death of the head of the family. He points out that certain guidelines have been framed in order to assess the actual living conditions of the family at the time of death of the employee. Marks are being awarded on the basis of these parameters, like number of wholly dependent family members; spouse or son, including adopted son, or daughter, brother or sister in the case of unmarried Government servant etc. 6. The eldest sister of the petitioner is admittedly given in marriage and therefore she cannot be said to be a dependent. As has been noticed already petitioner's mother is well employed in a Co-operative Society. More OP (CAT) No.941/2011 4 importantly, the petitioner is well qualified. It may be true that she may not have obtained a job now. But she has a better prospect of getting some employment, going by the qualification that she now possesses. It is revealed from the counter statement filed by the respondents before the Tribunal that the petitioner did not get the minimum point of 55 in order to get the benefit of the Scheme. 7. Keeping in view of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE mn.