om:69-cl-2018-june — Compassionate ground appointment to the Applicant herein, who is the daughter of Shri Mahendra Nath who worked as GDS BPM, Tinpukhuri Branch Office under Nalbari Barpeta Postal Division and died in harness on 5-1-2014 is to be reconsidered especially awarding marks for discharge benefits of items (i) and (ii) mentioned under Para. 7 of the judgment and fix the merit points. Based on the above, the case of the Applicant for compassionate appointment due to deat

Compassionate ground appointment to the Applicant herein, who is the daughter of Shri Mahendra Nath who worked as GDS BPM, Tinpukhuri Branch Office under Nalbari Barpeta Postal Division and died in harness on 5-1-2014 is to be reconsidered especially awarding marks for discharge benefits of items

(i) and

(ii) mentioned under Para. 7 of the judgment and fix the merit points. Based on the above, the case of the Applicant for compassionate appointment due to death of her father is to be decided afresh — The Respondents are directed by the Tribunal to reconsider the applicant's case for compassionate appointment, awarding additional merit points based on certain criteria, and conducting physical veri... — Facts: The Applicant is the daughter of Late Mahendra Nath Boro who died on 5-1-2014 while in service as GDS BPM, Tinpukhuri Branch Office under Nalbari Barpeta Postal Division. He had two issues namely, the Applicant born on 3-3-1983 and her brother born on 19-5-1985. Both are possessing HS qualification. The Applicant applied for compassionate appointment to her due to the death of her father, a Postal Department employee. Earlier, the Applicant was engaged on temporary basis as GDS/MC, Tinpukhuri B.O. for few days. After discharging her from her temporary duties as GDS/MC, she was not engaged further. Her request for compassionate ground appointment was negatived as learnt through RTI Act. She was given only 42 merit points while considering her case for compassionate appointment. The minimum marks above 50 obtained by others were given the said appointment. Merit points obtained by her for various attributes are noted in the judgments which totals 57. As there are number of post's vacant under the Respondents in Nalbari Barpeta Division, she seeks by this OA intervention of CAT to get her appointment under compassionate grounds. The case came up for hearing on 24-5-2017. Counsel for the Applicant submitted 3 (three) miscalculations on the part of the Respondents. The miscalculation were

(i) the lesser mark given on the basis of two dependants. The Applicant claims 9 marks instead of 7 marks given by Respondents,

(ii) the nature of house and the land on the basis of which the Applicant claims 6 points while the Respondents have given 0,

(iii) the Applicant received DCRG of ₹ 1,14,000 and accordingly she should get 15 points whereas she was given 10 as if they have given more than ₹ 1,50,000 of DCRG benefits. When the case came up for hearing on 14-6-2017, the CGSC admitted that the Applicant received DCRG benefits of ₹ 1,14,000 which is less than ₹ 1,50,000 and thus the Applicant gets 15 merit points instead of 10. Applicant submitted that prior to consideration of her case by CRC, the attribute 'own agricultural land and house' at Serial No. 4 of Para. 4 of the Directorate Letter, dated 14-12-2010 has been replaced by Letter, dated 14-1-2015. Hence, her marks in this regard should be awarded in terms of the Letter, dated 14-1-2015. She is entitled to 6 merit points under this head whereas she had been granted '0' marks. Attribute of 'no. of dependants' to the deceased employee, the Applicant is entitled to 9 merit points instead of 7. After hearing both sides, the Tribunal held: