Case Details Ashok Kumar Mewari vs Union of India & Others

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

5 December 2023

Case No.

Civil Appeal No. 7956 of 2023

Result

Allowed

Bench

J.K. Maheshwari, K.V. Viswanathan

Citation

[2023] 16 S.C.R. 1535 : 2023 INSC 1092

Issue for consideration

Appellant made a composite prayer for voluntary retirement on medical ground subject to the condition that his son may be appointed in his place on compassionate ground, in terms of the Circular dtd.14.06.2006. Whether the respondents were justified in only accepting his prayer for voluntary retirement, without accepting the prayer of compassionate appointment to his son.

Headnote

Service Law – Conditional voluntary retirement application, partially accepted – Impermissibility:

Held: A conditional request was made by the appellant to retire him voluntarily instead of offering him an alternative post and that his son be appointed at his place – Meaning thereby, that his request for voluntary retirement may be allowed only if his simultaneous request for compassionate appointment of his son is accepted – Thus, the prayer of voluntary retirement and to grant compassionate appointment were composite – Respondents by segregating the same, only accepted the prayer for voluntary retirement, without accepting appellant’s prayer of compassionate appointment to his son – In view of the ratio of the judgment in Ram Kesh Yadav such action is not justified when a request for voluntary retirement has been made subject to the condition stipulated in the letter to grant the compassionate appointment to his son, it ought to be accepted by the Board compositely, i.e., accepting both the requests, or rejected in toto – Further, applicability of the Circular dtd. 14.06.2006 was independent of the subsequent clarification of the Board’s letter dtd.12.11.2014 explaining medical de-categorization of the employees – Application for grant of voluntary retirement was made on 18.06.2013, prior to the purported clarificatory Circular dtd.12.11.2014 – Circular dtd.14.06.2006 is independent of other circulars – There is also no reference to the letter of 03.03.2009 in the Circular of 12.11.2014 – Order passed by the West Central Railway, Jabalpur Division, Jabalpur rejecting the claim of the appellant again, quashed – Orders passed by the Tribunal in the Original Application and review as also the order of the High Court, set-aside – Compassionate appointment, in the applicable post, be given to the Appellant’s son. [Paras 11, 12, 9, 14 and 15]

LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES

Food Corporation of India and Another vs. Ram Kesh Yadav and Another, [2007] 3 SCR 336 : (2007) 9 SCC 531 – relied on. OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED

ORDER AND APPEARANCES

JUDGMENT / ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT ORDER The Appellant who was an employee of the Railways applied for voluntary retirement on the ground of medical ailments, subject to appointment of his son Mukesh Mewari on compassionate ground. The Respondent-Union of India through Divisional Railway Manager, W.C. Railways, Jabalpur allowed the request of the Appellant, in part, by accepting the voluntary retirement without considering the prayer for grant of compassionate appointment to his son. Dissatisfied, the appellant filed Original Application No. 200/00398/2015 before the Central Administrativ

View Subscription Plans →