19 March 2022 4:28 AM GMT
The Chhattisgarh High Court held that even the illegitimate son/daughter is also entitled to a compassionate appointment. Justice Sanjay K. Aggarwal referred to the case of Union of India & Ors v. V.K. Tripathi, where it was held that,"Legitimacy of a child born from a marriage which is null and void, is a matter of public policy so as to protect a child born from such a marriage...
The Chhattisgarh High Court held that even the illegitimate son/daughter is also entitled to a compassionate appointment. Justice Sanjay K. Aggarwal referred to the case of Union of India & Ors v. V.K. Tripathi, where it was held that,
"Legitimacy of a child born from a marriage which is null and void, is a matter of public policy so as to protect a child born from such a marriage from suffering the consequences of illegitimacy. Hence, though the marriage may be null and void, a child who is born from the marriage is nonetheless treated as legitimate by sub-section (1) of Section 16."
The Court referred to judicial precedent to note that it is quite vivid that the petitioner herein, even if he is the illegitimate son of the deceased Government servant, would be entitled to consideration on compassionate ground and cannot be denied consideration on the ground that he is the illegitimate son of the deceased Government servant.
A writ petition was filed against the order directing the petitioner to obtain a succession certificate to claim a compassionate appointment on account of his father's death.
The deceased was working as Junior Assistant at Branch Pratappur of the Chhattisgarh State Warehousing Corporation. He died in harness on account of being infected by COVID- 19. Suresh Kumar Anchal claiming to be the son of the deceased with his first wife, claimed compassionate appointment by applying, whereas the present petitioner is also the deceased's son through the second wife applied for compassionate appointment.
In the petitioner's case, his mother's name is recorded in the nomination form submitted by the deceased. The present petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition before this Court where the Court had directed The Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Warehousing Corporation, to decide the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment. Now, an order has been passed rejecting the application filed by the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner and liberty have not filed a valid succession certificate has been given to the petitioner to consider the application after the valid succession certificate is obtained against which this writ petition has been filed.
On the question of who would be entitled to the appointment because of the two rival claimants (two sons) for a compassionate appointment, the Court referred to several circulars to know that preference has been given for consideration on compassionate ground and if a widow or widower of the deceased Government servant is not eligible, then only, son / adopted son would be entitled to consideration. In the absence of that, daughter / adopted daughter would be entitled to consideration.
In the instant case, an application has been filed by two sons of the deceased Government servant who have claimed compassionate appointment. Both the widows have not claimed compassionate appointments and relinquished their claim in favor of their respective sons. The Court noted that the relevant circular is silent about the manner/method of consideration in the case of two rival claims in one category.
It referred to the case of Raj Kishore Kumar v. the State of Bihar to re-affirm that the entitlement to the compassionate appointment has to be considered in order of seniority, i.e., case of the elder brother will have the priority, and only if his case is rejected, then the case of the younger brother shall be considered.
Setting aside the impugned order dated to produce succession certificate, the Court remitted the matter to the respondent authorities to consider the applications of the petitioner and the other son of the deceased for compassionate appointment after allowing them to file representation qua their entitlement/eligibility.
Case Title: Piyush Kumar Ancha v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Chh) 20
Click Here To Download The Order
Read The Order