Tuesday, August 30, 2022
Booking of Air Tickets on Government Account in respect of Leave Travel Concession (LTC): Instructions by DoP&T vide OM dated 29.08.2022
F. No. 31011/12/2022-Estt.A-IV
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training
Establishment A-IV Desk
North Block, New Delhi.
Dated 29th August, 2022
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject: Instructions on booking of Air Tickets on Government Account in respect of Leave Travel Concession (LTC) – regarding.
The undersigned is directed to refer to the above mentioned subject and to state that in view of the disinvestment of Air India and the consolidated instructions issued consequently by Department of Expenditure vide O.M. No. 19024/03/2021-E.IV dated 16.06.2022, which is also applicable in case of air journey in respect of LTC, it has been decided that:
In all cases of air travel in respect of LTC, air tickets shall be purchased only from the three Authorized Travel Agents (ATAs), namely:
(a) M/s Balmer Lawrie & Company Limited (BLCL),
(b) M/s Ashok Travels & Tours (ATT),
(c) Indian Railways Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd. (IRCTC).
- The choice of the travel agent for booking of ticket from the three authorized travel agents is left open to the Ministry/Department and the official in case of self booking, based on convenience and service quality. No agency charges/convenience fees will be paid to these ATAs.
- Government employees are to choose flight having the Best Available Fare on their entitled travel class which is the Cheapest Fare available, preferably for Non-stop flight in a given slot, mentioned below, at the time of booking. They are to retain the print-out of the concerned webpage of the ATAs having flight and fare details for the purpose of the settlement of the LTC claims.
(a) On the day of travel in the desired 3 hours’ slot of following time band — 00:00 hours to 03:00 hours, 03:00 hours to 06:00 hours, 06:00 hours to 09:00 hours, 09:00 hours to 12:00 hours, 12:00 hours to 15:00 hours, 15:00 hours to 18:00 hours, 18:00 hours to 21:00 hours, 21:00 hours to 24:00 hours.
(b) With provision of optimizing within a 10% price band, for convenience and comfort.
- Employees are encouraged to book flight tickets at least 21 days prior to the intended date of travel on LTC, to avail the most competitive fares and minimize burden on the exchequer.
- Employees are also encouraged to avoid unnecessary cancellations. Cancellations made less than 24 hours before intended travel on LTC, will require the submission of a self-declared justification by the employee. All the three ATAs have been directed to provide zero/nil cancellation charges. Till then, cancellation charges are to be reimbursed for all cases where cancellation was due to the circumstances/reasons beyond the control of Government employee.
- Employees should preferably book only one ticket for each leg of intended travel on LTC. Holding of more than one ticket is not allowed.
- While tickets may be arranged by the office through the travel agent, employees are encouraged to make ticket booking digitally through the Self Booking Tool/online booking website/portal of these 3 ATAs only. Employees must register their official Government Email-Id with these three agencies to book their air tickets digitally through above modes for travel by any airlines.
- In case of unavoidable circumstances, where the booking of ticket is done from unauthorized travel agent/website, the Financial Advisors of the Ministry /Department and Head of Department not below the rank of Joint Secretary in subordinate/attached offices are authorized to grant relaxation.
- No Mileage Points will be generated against travel on Government account.
Provisions for Advances
- Government employees entitled for air travel, may apply for LTC advance with the print-out of the concerned webpage of authorized travel agency having suitable flight and fare details while tracking the fare of the flight under the three hour time slot, as mentioned at Para l{iii)(a) above, at least 30 days prior to the intended date of journey.
- Government employees not entitled for air travel and wish to travel by air but not under the Special Dispensation Scheme, may apply for LTC advance with reference to Rail/Bus fare.
- Those Government employees who are not entitled for air travel but who wish to travel by air under the Special Dispensation Scheme, may apply for LTC advance with reference to Rail/Bus fare from their Headquarters/place of posting up to Kolkata/Guwahati/Chennai/Visakhapatnam/Delhi/Amritsar plus air fare (indicated in print-out of the concerned webpage of authorized travel agency having suitable flight and fare details) from the relevant railhead in Kolkata/ Guwahati/ Chennai/ Visakhapatnam/ Delhi/ Amritsar till the place of visit in North East Region/Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir/ Union Territory of Andaman & Nicobar/Union Territory of Ladakh.
- Provisions for Reimbursements
- In case, at the time of actual booking of the ticket after receiving the advance, there is any difference in fare owing to the time gap between request for advance and grant of advance, the difference in fare will be adjusted at the time of settlement of LTC claim.
- In all cases wherein the
non-entitled Government employees travel by air under Special
Dispensation Scheme directly from their Headquarters/place of posting to
the place of visit in NER/J&K/A&N/Ladakh, the Government
employees must take the print-out of the concerned webpage having flight
and fare details of the flight for relevant railhead viz. Kolkata/
Guwahati/ Delhi/ Amritsar/ Chennai/ Vishakhapatnam to the place of visit
viz. NER or UT of J&K or UT of Ladakh or UT of A&N within the
same time-slot where the direct flight has been booked for the purpose
of reimbursement. In case the flight tickets are not available in the
same slot, the print out of the details of the flights available in the
next slot may be retained.
In such cases, the reimbursement will be restricted to the actual air fare for the direct journey or the fare entitled under Special Dispensation Scheme, whichever is less. - Government employees not entitled for air travel and wish to travel by air but not under the Special Dispensation Scheme, are also required to book their air ticket through only the three ATAs mentioned above irrespective of booking time limit. However, the reimbursement will be restricted to the actual air fare or the entitled train/bus fare for the shortest route, whichever is a
(Satish Kumar)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
Tel: 2304 0341
To
All Secretaries of Ministries/Departments
(As per Standard List) :
Copy to:
- Comptroller & Auditor General of India, New Delhi.
- Union Public Service Commission, New Delhi.
- Central Vigilance Commission, New Delhi.
- Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi.
- Parliament Library, New Delhi.
- All Union Territory Administrations
- Lok Sabha/ Rajya Sabha Secretariat.
- All Attached and Subordinate Offices of Ministry of Personnel, P.G. & Pensions.
- Hindi Section for Hindi version.
Additional Pension: Determination of relevant date from which senior retired AIS officers should be paid additional 20% of basic pension: DoP&PW clarifies
No.29018/1 0/2022-AIS-II(Pension)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions
Department of Personnel and Training
North Block, New Delhi
Dated 24/08/2022
To
All Chief Secretaries of all
State Governments/UTs
Subject: Determination of relevant date from which senior retired AIS officers should be paid additional 20% of basic pension.
Sir/Madam,
Reference is invited to Rule 18(1-A) of AIS (DCRB) Rules, 1958 which provides that in addition to pension admissible in accordance with clause Rule 18(1)(b) of AIS (OCRB) Rules, 1958, after completion of eighty years of age or above, additional pension shall be payable to the retired member of the service in the following manner :-
| Age of pensioner | Additional Pension |
| From 80 years to less than 85 years | 20% of basic pension |
| From 85 years to less than 90 years | 30% of basic pension |
| From 90 years to Tess than 95 years | 40% of basic pension |
| From 98 years to Tess than 100 years | 50% of basic pension |
| 100 years or more | 100% of basic pension |
2. In this context, as per the admissible Rules/provisions, additional pension shall be payable from first day of the calendar month in which it falls due and not from the date of completion of 80 years of age. For example, a pensioner born either on 01.08.1942 or on 20.08.1942 shall be eligible for additional pension at the rate of 20% of the basic pension with effect from 01.08.2022.
3. State/UT Governments are requested to ensure that there is no discrepancy in the interpretation of the aforementioned Rule and the retired AIS officers are paid additional pension as per the above provision.
Yours sincerely,
(Kuldeep Chaudhary)
Under Secretary to Government of India
011 — 2309 4714
Copy To:
i. Shri SAT Rizvi , IAS (Retd.), 3/1 , Vijay Khand, Gomtinagar, Lucknow-226010
ii. Shri Sanjiv Narain Mathur, Joint Secretary, DoPPW, Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi-110003
SB ORDER 14/2022 - REGARDING INTRODUCTION OF THE ONLINE ACCOUNT OPENING AND CLOSURE THROUGH DOP INTERNET BANKING FOR PUBLIC PROVIDENT FUND (PPF) ACCOUNTS
INSTRUCTIONS ON BOOKING OF AIR TICKETS ON GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF LEAVE TRAVEL CONCESSION (LTC) – REGARDING
Monday, August 29, 2022
No recovery of over payment from the employee/pensioner, where employees is not at fault: Supreme Court.
No recovery of over payment from the employee/pensioner at belated stage, where employees is not at fault: Supreme Court
The bench of Justices M.R. Shah & B.V. Nagarathna was dealing with the appeal challenging the judgment passed by the Madhya Pradesh HC by which the High Court has allowed the said writ appeal preferred by the State of Madhya Pradesh and has set aside the judgment passed by the Single Judge. As the benefits were wrongly paid under the circular dated 23.05.2009, which was subsequently withdrawn on 30.05.2012, the State Government ordered recovery of the excess amount paid along with the interest. The communication withdrawing the circular and the recovery of the excess amount paid along with the interest were the subject matter of the Writ Petition preferred by the M.P. Medical Officers Association.
Text of Judgement reproduced below:-
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5527 OF 2022
M.P. Medical Officers Association …Appellant(s)
Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. …Respondent(s)
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5528 OF 2022
Dr. Ram Naresh Rajauria & Ors.
…Appellant(s) Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. …Respondent(s)
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5529 OF 2022
Dr. Sushil Kumar Khare & Ors.
…Appellant(s) Versus
The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. …Respondent(s)
AND
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5530 OF 2022
Dr. Deepak Phanse & Ors. …Appellant(s)
Versus
Reason: The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. …Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
M.R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur in Writ Appeal No. 1073 of 2018 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ appeal preferred by the State of Madhya Pradesh and others and has quashed and set aside the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge passed in Writ Petition No. 6236 pf 2014, the original writ petitioners – M.P. Medical Officers Association and other individual members of the Association have filed the present appeals.
2. The members of the appellant Association and other appellants were working as Specialists and Dental Specialists respectively under the M.P. Public Health and Family Welfare (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1988. The said Rules were repealed by the M.P. Public Health and Family Welfare (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 2007 published in the Gazette on 27.03.2008. The State issued an order on 26.08.2008 to grant higher pay-scale on completion of six years to the Medical Officers, Dental Surgeons and officers working in the Specialist cadre in a four tier pay-scales. Later, the circular dated 23.05.2009 was issued to the effect that the period from the date of appointment shall be counted as notional appointment though the benefit of the scheme shall be granted from the date of issuance of the order of the State Government dated 26.08.2008. In the circular dated 23.05.2009, it was also provided that the fourth tier pay-scale will be payable on completion of the prescribed service period, but the financial benefits shall be extended w.e.f. 26.8.2008. The period between the date of completion of the prescribed period and 26.08.2008 shall be eligible for notional pay fixation. Having found that the circular dated 23.05.2009 was wrongly issued and was issued without approval of the Finance Department and as the benefits flowing from the circular dated 23.05.2009 were having financial implications/burden and it was found that the said circular was issued by the authority, who had no competence and therefore vide communication dated 30.05.2012, the circular dated 23.05.2009 came to be withdrawn. However, the respective Medical Officers working as Specialists, Dental Specialists and the officers working in the specialist’s cadre – members of the appellant association were granted the actual benefit flowing from the circular dated 23.05.2009 till 30.05.2012, i.e., till the circular dated 23.05.2009 was withdrawn. As the benefits were wrongly paid under the circular dated 23.05.2009, which was subsequently withdrawn on 30.05.2012, the State Government ordered recovery of the excess amount paid alongwith the interest.
2.1 The communication dated 30.05.2012 withdrawing the circular dated 23.05.2009 and the recovery of the excess amount paid alongwith the interest were the subject matter of Writ Petition No. 6236 of 2014 preferred by the M.P. Medical Officers Association. Individual writ petitioners also filed their separate writ petitions, however, the Writ Petition No.6236 of 2014 preferred by the Association was treated as the lead matter. By common judgment and order, the learned Single Judge allowed all the writ petitions and quashed the communication dated 30.05.2012 withdrawing the circular dated 23.05.2009. The learned Single Judge also quashed the orders of recovery of the excess amount paid alongwith the interest.
2.2 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 20.12.2017 passed in Writ Petition No. 6236 of 2014, the State preferred Writ Appeal No. 1073 of 2018 before the Division Bench of the High Court. By the impugned judgment and order, the Division Bench of the High Court has allowed the aforesaid writ appeal and has quashed and set aside the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge quashing and setting aside the communication dated 30.05.2012 withdrawing the circular dated 23.05.2009 and also quashing the recovery of the excess amount paid alongwith the interest. The impugned judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court passed in Writ Appeal No. 1073 of 2018 is the subject matter of the present appeals.
3. We have heard Shri P.S. Patwalia, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant and Shri Saurabh Mishra, learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondent State.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective partis and having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court and the ground on which the circular dated 23.05.2009 was withdrawn namely, the same was issued without authority and/or competence and was issued without any approval and/or concurrence of the Finance Department as the benefits flowing from the circular dated 23.05.2009 were having financial implications/burden, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court upholding the communication dated 30.05.2012 withdrawing the circular dated 23.05.2009. The Division Bench of the High Court is absolutely justified in quashing and setting aside the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court quashing the communication dated 30.05.2012 withdrawing the circular dated 23.05.2009.
4.1 However, at the same time, the Division Bench of the High Court has erred in quashing and setting aside the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge allowing the writ petitions and setting aside the recovery of excess amount paid for the period between 2009 to 2012, which was sought to be recovered with interest.
5. It is not in dispute that the members of the appellant association, who were serving as Specialists, Dental Specialists and officers in the specialist’s cadre got the benefits under the circular dated 23.05.2009. It was the Department/State, who issued the circular dated 23.05.2009 and paid the benefits under the circular dated 23.05.2009 to the members of the appellant association, which subsequently came to be withdrawn by the State in the year 2012. Therefore, as such, there was neither any misrepresentation on the part of the concerned employees – members of the appellant association nor can the mistake be attributed to them. The mistake, if any, can be said to be that of the Department/State, who issued the circular dated 23.05.2009 under which the members of the association were given certain benefits till the same was withdrawn in the year 2012. Therefore, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the State was not justified in ordering recovery of the excess amount paid along with the interest. It is true that stricto sensu, the decision of this Court in the case of State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih, (2015) 4 SCC 334 may not be applicable. However, at the same time, as observed hereinabove, and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the State was not justified in ordering recovery of the excess amount paid with interest, more particularly, when it is reported that some of the doctors/dentists – members of the association have retired on attaining the age of superannuation and the recovery shall be from their pension/pensionary benefits. However, at the same time, their pay fixation and the pension shall have to be as per the order dated 26.08.2008.
6. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, all these Appeals Succeed in part. The impugned judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court upholding the recovery of the excess amount paid alongwith interest is hereby quashed and set aside.
In result, there shall not be any recovery of the excess amount paid pursuant to the circular dated 23.05.2009 till the same was withdrawn on 30.05.2012. However, for all other purposes including the pay fixation and pension etc., the same shall be now worked out as per the order dated 26.08.2008, as if, the circular dated 23.05.2009 was never issued.
Present appeals are accordingly partly allowed to the aforesaid extent. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
………………………………….J.
[M.R. SHAH]
………………………………….J.
[B.V. NAGARATHNA
NEW DELHI; AUGUST 26, 2022
Text
Sunday, August 28, 2022
All MTS from GDS promotive candidate eligible to write Postman Exam but promotion of postman is as per direction of case judgement
Friday, August 26, 2022
Promotion/Transfers/Posting in the Senior Administrative Grade (SAG) of the Indian Postal service (IPoS) Group 'A'
Allocation of Postal Circles to the candidates nominated by SSC on the basis of CHSLE, 2019 for the posts of PA/SA
VERIFICATION OF HIGH VALUE WITHDRAWAL OF RS.10000/- AND ABOVE IN SAVINGS ACCOUNT AT BO AND SINGLE HAND OFFICE -CLARIFICATION.
Thursday, August 25, 2022
VERY SAD NEWS
Shri- Sardhar Gurdev singh former General secretary of NUPE POSTMEN & MTS Gr-C & President of FNPO very shocking news to FNPO/NUPE POSTMEN & MTS GR-c family.
We pay homage to Shri Sardhar Gurdev singh former General secretary and stand by his bereaved family.
FNPO/NUPE POSTMEN & MTS Gr-C
CHQ DELHI 110054
Shri Sardar Gurudev Singh is no more with us. He ornamented the post of General Secretary National Union of Postman & MTS and also President FNPO for a long time. He is a son of Gopal Singh Josh (who was also former president FNPO and General Secretary National Union of Postman & MTS& one of the founder of FNPTO) passed away on 21.08.2022. The services rendered by Gurudev Singh to the FNPO as well as Postman Union is a golden period in the history of FNPO. He was a pride of FNPO. His services will be long remembered. FNPO conveys its deepest condolence to his wife and family members, particularly his daughter and son-in-law. Let us all pray for the soul to rest in peace. OM SHANTHI.
CLICK HERE TO VIEW MORE PHOTOS
Government has decided to fill vacant Posts adopting a mission mode approach- Member (P) writes D.O. letter to All Heads of the Circles.
MACP Scheme from 01.09.2008, Financial upgradation in next grade not in promotional hierarchy: Supreme Court in C.A. No.-005545 /2022 Judgement date 22.08.2022
Case Details:-
- Judgement Date: 22-08-2022
- Diary Number 22508 / 2021
- Case Number C.A. No.-005545-005545 / 2022
- Petitioner Name UNION OF INDIA
- Respondent Name EX. HC/GD VIRENDER SINGH
- Petitioner’s Advocate B. V. BALARAM DAS
- Respondent’s Advocate
Bench HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA, HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI - Judgment By HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
- Matter raised:-
2. ….. Appeals by way of special leave raise three issues, all of which are connected and relate to the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme, namely:
(a) Whether the MACP Scheme is applicable and to be implemented with effect from 1st January 2006, the date from which the Central Civil Service (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 were enforced, or in terms of O.M. dated 19th May 2009 with effect from 1st September 2009?
(b) Whether under the MACP Scheme the respondents are entitled to financial upgradation equivalent to the pay scale/grade pay of the next promotional post in the hierarchy, or the immediate next grade pay in the hierarchy of the pay bands as stated in Section 1, Part A of the First Schedule to the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008?
(c) Whether the respondents, who belong to the Central Armed Police Forces, are entitled to grant of financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme, if for administrative reasons they were unable to fulfil the pre-proportional norms?
Findings:-
- It can be stated that the MACP Scheme, like the ACP Scheme, is an incentive scheme devised with the object of ensuring that the employees who have stagnated for lack of adequate promotional avenues are given benefit in the form of financial upgradation.
- The financial upgradation is personal, does not amount to regular or actual functional promotion, and does not require creation of a new post.
- Financial upgradation is granted to only those employees who have not received actual or functional promotion even after completion of the requisite service period, though otherwise, they fulfil the prescribed conditions for promotion.
- Under the MACP Scheme, an employee is entitled to three financial upgradations on completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of regular service to the next higher grade pay in the hierarchy of the pay bands and grade pay as given in Section 1, Part A of the First Schedule of the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008.
- Sixth Central Pay Commission to bring systematic changes in the erstwhile ACP Scheme so that all employees, irrespective of the existing hierarchical structure in their organisations/cadres, get identical financial benefit of the next immediate grade pay instead of the pay/grade pay applicable to the next promotional post.
- The ACP Scheme and MACP Schemes were held to be in the nature of incentive schemes to relieve stagnation and not as a part of pay structure, which had revised the pay and the dearness allowance with effect from 1.1.2006.
- A liberal, pragmatic and ameliorative approach is required to succour genuine grievances of the personnel doing duty for the nation, owing to which they forgo participation in pre-promotional courses.
- Judgement in view of discussions:-
12. ………………. the appeals filed by the Union of India are partly allowed and impugned judgments, to the extent they hold that the MACP Scheme applies with effect from 1.1.2006 and that under the MACP Scheme the employees are entitled to financial upgradation equivalent to the next promotional post, are set aside. MACP Scheme is applicable with effect from 1.9.2008 and as per the MACP Scheme, the entitlement is to financial upgradation equivalent to the immediate next grade pay in the hierarchy of the pay bands as stated in Section 1, Part A of the First Schedule to the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008. The third issue, which relates to the fulfilment of pre-promotional norms for grant of financial upgradation, is decided against the appellant-Union of India to the extent that this would not be insisted in the case of the Central Armed Forces personnel where, for administrative or other reasons, they could not be sent or undergo the pre-promotional course. All pending applications are disposed of.
Click here to view/download the Judgement
The Allahabad High Court has ruled that the sister of a deceased government employee cannot be given a job on compassionate grounds if his wife is alive and has claimed for appointment
.Sister of deceased govt employee can’t be given compassionate job instead of his wife: HC
The Allahabad High Court has ruled that the sister of a deceased government employee cannot be given a job on compassionate grounds if his wife is alive and has claimed for appointment. Justice Neeraj Tiwari gave the order and dismissed a petition filed by Kumari Mohani, the sister of a deceased employee, seeking the court’s direction to the authorities concerned to consider her claim for appointment on compassionate ground.
The court observed, “In the present case, there is no dispute of fact that the deceased employee was married and his wife is alive and also claiming appointment on compassionate grounds. Therefore, under the rules, she is only entitled for appointment and no relief can be granted to the petitioner — sister.”
The father of the petitioner was working as ‘safai karmchari’ and during the course of service, he died.
After his death, the brother of the petitioner was granted appointment on compassionate grounds under the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 as ‘safai karmchari’.
The brother of the petitioner also died in a road accident.
After his death, her mother gave consent for the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate grounds. The petitioner had filed a representation before authorities for her appointment, which was pending for decision.
The present petition was filed seeking direction to authorities to decide her representation for appointment, which has been declined by the court.
The counsel for the respondent had objected to the claim raised by the petitioner and said after the death of an employee, the first right on compassionate appointment goes to husband or wife, followed by sons/adopted sons, daughters including adopted daughters and widowed daughter-in-law, and then unmarried brothers, unmarried sisters and widowed mother dependent on the deceased employee if he/she was unmarried.
Wife is claiming compassionate job, she is only entitled instead of sister of deceased Govt employee: Text of High Court Judgement reproduced below:-
A.F.R.
Court No. – 34
Case :- WRIT – A No. – 4174 of 2022
Petitioner :- Km. Mohini
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Prakhar Tandon
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Shravan Kumar Pandey,Shyam Narain Pandey
Hon’ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for respondent no. 1, Sri Yashwant Singh, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3 and Sri S.N. Pandey, learned counsel for respondent no. 4.
Present petition has been filed with following prayers;
“(i). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to decide the representation dated 01.12.2021 for compassionate appointment of the petitioner within a month.
(ii). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner.”
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that father of petitioner was working on the post of “Safai Karmchari Ward 99/107” at Nagar Nigam, Kanpur and during the course of service, he died. After his death, brother of petitioner (son of deceased- employee) has been granted appointment on compassionate ground under the provisions of U.P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules, 1974”) as “Safai Karmchari” to cater the need of all family members dependent upon deceased- employee including petitioner- sister. Unfortunately, in a road accident, brother of petitioner also died on 16.10.2021. After his death, her mother has given consent for appointment of petitioner on compassionate ground. Petitioner has filed representation dated 01.12.2021 before respondent no. 2 for appointment, which is pending for decision, therefore, a direction may be issued to respondent no. 2 to decide the same and appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground under the provisions of Rules, 1974 amended vide The Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying In Harness (Twelfth Amendment) Rules, 2021 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules, 2021).
Learned counsels for the respondents objected the submissions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that as per Rules, 1974 readwith amended Rules 2021, definition of family is given in order of hierarchy. After death of deceased- employee, first right goes to husband or wife, second right goes to sons/ adopted sons, third right goes to daughters (including adopted daughters) and widowed daughter-in-law and fourth right goes to unmarried brothers, unmarried sisters and widowed mother dependent on the deceased Government servant, if the deceased Government servant was unmarried. He next submitted that in the present case, there is no dispute that deceased- employee was married and his wife has also raised a claim for appointment on compassionate ground after death of her husband. Therefore, as per Rules, 1974 readwith amended Rules 2021, petitioner has no right of appointment after death of deceased- employee and respondent no. 4 is only having right to be appointed on the compassionate ground after death of her husband.
Learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute the aforesaid facts and only submitted that earlier appointment was given to her brother to cater the need of all family members dependant upon her father, therefore, petitioner is also entitled to get appointment after death of her brother.
I have considered the rival submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record and Rules, 1974 readwith amended Rules 2021. Language of Rules is very much clear, which provides that first right of appointment on compassionate ground goes to husband or wife as the case may be in case of death of Government employee. For ready reference, Rules, 1974 is being quoted hereinbelow;
In the present case, there is no dispute of fact that deceased- employee was married and his wife is alive and also claiming appointment on compassionate ground. Therefore, under the Rules, she is only entitled for appointment and no relief can be granted to petitioner- sister, which is at Serial No. 4 in order of hierarchy given in Rules, 1974 readwith amended Rules 2021, in case deceased Government employee is unmarried. Therefore, petition is having no force and liable to be dismissed.
So far as claim of petitioner about her maintenance is concerned, it is open for her to seek appropriate remedy against respondent no. 4, if any Rule provides for the same.
Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed with aforesaid observations. No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 16.8.2022
Arvind
Click here to get PDF of Judgment
News Source: Economic Times
