IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.20716 of 2010
AMRESH KUMAR ABHAY @ AMRESH ABHAY
Versus
THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS
-----------
4 29.04.2011 Learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged
the findings of the Tribunal in paragraph 15 of the
impugned order that there was no vacancy in the quota of
the relevant years for compassionate appointment mainly by
relying upon a statement that the case of the applicant was
first recommended in the year 2002 itself and if two
vacancies in the relevant quota were filled up till 05.02.2004
i.e. twenty days before the second recommendation in
favour of the petitioner made on 25.02.2004, the case of the
petitioner should have been considered along with those
who had been adjusted against two vacancies.
It appears that the case of the petitioner was not
considered on merit on the ground that there was no
vacancy in the relevant years for compassionate
appointment.
There is no material in the impugned order to
show whether there was any recommendation made for the
compassionate appointment in the year 2002 itself; rather in
2
paragraph 1 of the impugned order the case of the petitioner
has been noted showing it to be based on recommendation
dated 25.02.2004.
Although four weeks’ time given for filing
counter affidavit has expired, further prayer has been made
for grant of time.
By way of last opportunity, four weeks’ further
time is granted to the respondents. The reply in counter
affidavit must meet the aforesaid submission of learned
counsel for the petitioner and the alleged recommendation
made in the year 2002 vide Annexure 1 to the writ petition.
Put up this case after four weeks under the same
heading amongst first ten cases.
If further adjournment will be prayed then the
respondents will be put to costs.
(Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)
(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)
SC