1. This intra-court appeal is directed against the order dated 14.01.2020 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court whereby writ petition preferred by the writ-petitioner/appellant herein, assailing the denial of appointment on compassionate ground under the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996 (for short, hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules of 1996’), has been dismissed.
2. Precisely, the facts of the case are that writ-petitioner's father Sh. Danaram, who was employed as Class IV employee with the respondents died while in service on 08.09.2018. The writ-petitioner moved an application seeking appointment on compassionate ground under the Rules of 1996, which was rejected on the ground that the writ-petitioner is having more than two children and, therefore, he is not eligible for appointment under the Rules of 1996.
3. The learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition observed that sub-rule (1) of Rule 6 of the Rules of 1996 sets a clear roadblock in petitioner's way of getting appointment on compassionate ground as he does not fulfill the service conditions, particularly the requirement of not having more than two children, which admittedly is a part of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Subordinate Service Rules, 1965 and all other relevant Rules.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that dependents of deceased Government servant seeking appointment under the Rules of 1996 constitute one class and out of that class, the appellant cannot be picked up for different treatment, being given. Learned counsel submits that as a matter of fact the appellant has three issues, is in much need of employment compared to person having two or less even. It is submitted that the object underlying the Rules of 1996 is to extend immediate succor to the bereaved family of the deceased Government servant and thus denial of appointment to the appellant is apparently against the object sought to be achieved by framing the Rules of 1996.
5. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the material available on record.
6. Undoubtedly, when a Government servant dies while in service one of his/her dependents may be considered for appointment in Government service, subject to the condition under employment under the said Rules shall not be admissible in cases where the spouse or at least one of sons, unmarried daughters, adopted son/adopted unmarried daughter of the deceased Government servant is already employed on regular basis under the Central/any State Government or statutory Board, Organization/Corporation owned or controlled wholly or partially by the Central/any State Government.
7. But then, as per Rule 6 of the Rules of 1996, the dependent may be considered for appointment to the post specified according to his/her educational qualification and fulfilling other service conditions irrespective of rank and status of the deceased Government servant. Further, as per Rule 7 of the Rules of 1996, the dependent should possess the qualification prescribed for the post under the concerned service Rules.
8. It is not disputed before us that under the Rules of 1965 and other relevant Rules governing the employment in the State Government, the dependent of deceased Government servant aspirant for appointment on compassionate ground, is required to fulfill the condition of not having more than two children as on the cut off date.
9. We are of considered opinion that in absence of any provision in the Rules, providing for relaxation of eligibility qualification and other service conditions, appointment cannot be offered to the dependent of the deceased Government servant, having more than two children.
10. In this view of the matter, we are in agreement with the view taken by the learned Single Judge of this Court.
11. The special appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs.