Compassionate Appointment Can’t Be Sought Long After Death Of Family’s Bread Winner, Doesn’t Continue In Perpetuity: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has observed that compassionate appointment cannot be sought long after the death of a family’s bread winner and is not a right which continues in perpetuity.
A division bench comprising Justice c Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla observed that compassionate appointment caters to a very specific exigency, which dies with efflux of time.
“Compassionate appointment cannot, therefore, be sought long after the bread winner of a family dies. It is not a right which continues in perpetuity till purged,” the Court said.
It added that the authorities have to satisfy themselves that the family in question is placed in distress and that there js a need for “immediate succour” after death of the main bread winner.
“The authorities who are approached for compassionate appointment have to satisfy themselves that, owing to the death of the main bread winner of the family, the family has been placed in distress and is unable to fend for itself and that there is need for immediate succour,” the Court said.
The Bench dismissed a plea filed by son of a Constable working in the Central Industrial Security Force, who expired on September 21, 1988, while in harness.
In September 2000, the wife of the deceased applied for compassionate appointment but was not granted appointment as she did not possess the requisite qualification for the post of Constable.
In 2018, the son and his mother once again applied for compassionate appointment for the former. It was claimed that the son had attained majority in 2014, but did not possess the requisite qualification for the post of Constable at and thus, applied in 2018 and not before.
In January 2020, they were informed that the son had not been recommended for compassionate appointment.
The plea was therefore filed seeking a mandamus to the authorities to grant compassionate appointment as Constable to the son.
Rejecting the plea, the Court observed that allowing applications for compassionate appointment more than a decade after the death of a family member would do “complete disservice” to the very concept of compassionate appointment and would convert it into an alternate mode of recruitment.
It observed that compassionate appointment is intended to enable a family of a government servant who dies in harness to tide over the immediately indigent circumstances in which it may find itself. It is well settled that compassionate appointment is not an alternative mode of recruitment, it added.
“We are, therefore, in no position to come to the aid of the petitioner. The writ petition is completely devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed,” the Court said.
Title: SACHIN YADAV v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS