9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (2) TMI 710X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... b) Such request should be accompanied by a medical certificate issued by an Authorised Medical Officer, subject to verification by FCI. c) The benefit of compassionate appointment shall be given only to a male dependant, (of the age group between 18 years and 30 years), that too in the handling labour category, subject to an Authorised Medical Officer confirming the medical fitness of such dependant to handle/carry bags of big size. d) The application for compassionate appointment shall be made in the prescribed form, within three months from the date of retirement. e) Compassionate appointment will be given only in deserving cases, that is, where there is no earning member in the family of the retired worker, or where it is found that the financial benefits which are available to the worker on retirement will not be sufficient to meet the needs for running the family. The Scheme designated the Senior Regional Manager/Regional Manager as the competent authority and made it clear that compassionate appointment is discretionary. The Scheme stated : Notwithstanding anything contained in the above, the compassionate ground appointment is not as a matter of right but p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jection dated 19/21.12.2001 was made available to the Respondents. Immediately, the respondents filed CMWP No. 13032 of 2003 for quashing the order dated 19/21.12.2001 and seeking a direction to FCI to appoint the first respondent to the post of handling labour in place of second respondent who had retired on medical grounds. 4. The said writ petition was resisted by FCI on the ground that the first respondent was not entitled to appointment on compassionate grounds, as the second respondent had already crossed the age limit of 55 years when he made the application on 26.4.1999. 5. A learned Single Judge accepted the contention of the FCI and held that the first respondent was not entitled to compassionate appointment, as the second respondent had already completed the age of 55 years when he made the application. Consequently, the writ petition was rejected on 29.3.2005. The appeal filed by the respondents against the said order was allowed by a Division Bench of the High Court by order dated 19.9.2005. The Division Bench was of the view that once FCI accepted the request of an employee for retirement on medical grounds under the compassionate appointment scheme, it was obli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Corporation of India v. Asha Ramchandra Ambedkar [1994 (2) SCC 718], this Court stressed the need to examine the terms of the Rules/Scheme governing compassionate appointments and ensure that the claim satisfied the requirements before directing compassionate appointment. In this case, the scheme clearly bars compassionate appointment to the dependant of an employee who seeks voluntary retirement on medical grounds, after attaining the age of 55 years. There is a logical and valid object in providing that the benefit of compassionate appointment for a dependant of an employee voluntarily retiring on medical grounds, will be available only where the employee seeks such retirement before completing 55 years. But for such a condition, there will be a tendency on the part of employees nearing the age of superannuation, to take advantage of the scheme and seek voluntary retirement at the fag end of their service, on medical grounds, and thereby virtually creating employment by 'succession'. It is not permissible for the court to relax the said condition relating to age of the employee. Whenever a cut off date or age is prescribed, it is bound to cause hardship in marginal cases, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecting the conditional offer, or making a counter offer. But what the offeree cannot do, when an offer is conditional, is to accept a part of the offer which results in performance by the offeror and then reject the condition subject to which the offer is made. 11. In the context of second Respondent's conditional offer of voluntary retirement contained in the letter dated 26.4.1999, FCI had, therefore, the following options : (a) Reject the request for voluntary retirement on the ground that a conditional offer was contrary to the Scheme and it was not willing to consider any conditional offer. (b) Reject the request for compassionate appointment on the ground that the employee was more than 55 years of age or on the ground that it was not a deserving case or because there was no vacancy, and then refer the employee to a Medical Board for compulsory retirement on medical grounds. (c) Require the employee to make separate applications for voluntary retirement on medical grounds and for compassionate appointment strictly as per rules and the scheme. (d) Accept the request of the employee for voluntary retirement on medical grounds subject to the condition stipulat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rounds. A compulsory retirement by the employer on medical grounds is different from a voluntary retirement by the employee on medical grounds. In fact the scheme earlier provided for compassionate appointment of a dependant, only when an employee was (compulsorily) retired by the employer, on medical grounds. The scheme was expanded on 3.7.1996, to provide for compassionate appointment for a dependant, when an employee voluntarily retired on medical grounds. 13. The appellant next contended that even if its action was found to suffer from some infirmity, the employee could at best contend that the action retiring him from service with effect from 31.7.2000 was illegal, but it could not be foisted with the obligation to offer employment to the son of the employee. It is, therefore, submitted that even if any relief was to be given, it ought to have been restricted to some nominal compensation for premature retirement as at the end of 31.7.2000. 14. The question in this case is not whether the request of the respondents was contrary to the scheme. Nor is it the question, whether the scheme would be violated if the first respondent is appointed on compassionate grounds. The lim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
