Sanjit Kumar Agrawala v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19296 of 2018 ====================================================== Sanjit Kumar Agrawala S/o Late Ramdayal Singh, resident of village and Post Bairka, P.S. Atari, District Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through the Chief Post Master General, Bihar Circle, Patna-800001.

2.

The Assistant Director (Recruitment), Indian Postal Department, Office of Chief of Post Master, Bihar Circle, Patna-800001. 3.

The Senior Superintendent of Post, Gaya Division, Gaya. 4.

The Circle Compassionate Appointment Committee Directorate Post, Bihar Circle, Patna - 800001.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kumar Dhirendra Pratap Singh, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Awadhesh Kuer Pandey, Sr. CGC Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, ASG ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY) 23-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Union of India.

The petitioner has applied for appointment on compassionate ground on account of the fact that his father was working in the department of Indian Postal and Telegraph as Branch Post Master and he died on 26.03.2014. Admittedly, it is clear that he died just before three months of his superannuation. It is also apparently clear that the petitioner is two brothers and at present, both have entered into marriage and both have their own children. Already the petitioner has attained

Patna High Court CWJC No.19296 of 2018(2) dt.23-01-2020 2/2 the age of 43 years, the purpose for grant of compassionate appointment would not be achieved, inasmuch as, after receipt of the application of the petitioner, they have calculated 20 points and for appointment, minimum 50 points is required, but the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the calculation of marks is wrong, as 15 marks he should have been granted under the heading of family pension as well as different heading. Admittedly, the petitioner is aged about 43 years, has already wife and children, in such circumstances, the claim, he was dependent on his father, does not arise that too in a situation the left over period of service of his father was three months. We do not find any merit in the present case, as we are not satisfied with the reasons and purpose for compassionate appointment would be achieved, reliance can be placed on the judgment reported in (1994) 4 SCC 138, Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs. State of Haryana and others.

Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) ( Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Mahesh/- U