IMPORTANT POINT
Appointment on compassionate ground cannot be claimed as a matter of right and such appointment has to be made in accordance with rules, regulations or administration instructions taking into consideration the financial condition of family of deceased.

JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J.-Leave granted.

2. Respondent was found to be entitled for appointment under the die-in-harness scheme, by a learned Single Judge of the Guwahati High Court at Imphal Bench, whose view was endorsed by the Division Bench. The State of Manipur is in appeal.

3. There is practically no controversy so far as the factual aspects are concerned and, therefore, need to be noted in brief.

4. Respondent s father died in harness on 19.7.1980. A writ petition (W.P. (C) No. 1202/2001) was filed in the year 2001 by the respondent who pleaded that he was initially offered Grade-IV post by order dated 15.12.1999, but no appointment was made. The writ application was filed for direction to the concerned authorities for giving appointment under the die-in-harness scheme. The State resisted the claim on the ground that not only was the claim belated but also in view of the ban imposed on appointments, the question of making any appointment did not arise. Further the letter issued was inconsequential as there was a clear stipulation in the scheme itself about concurrence of Government in the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Personnel Division).

5. Learned Single Judge of the High Court found that after having issued the letter in 1999, the belated approach by the respondent cannot be a ground for denying appointment under die-in-harness scheme and direction was given to the State to forthwith appoint the respondent. Appeal by the State before the Division Bench suffered dismissal.

6. In support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellant-State submitted that the respondent s father died on 19.7.1980. The respondent applied for a post on 25.7.1997. The scheme itself provides the time period within which an application has to be filed. The letter dated 15.12.1999 does not confer any right on the respondent as the scheme itself provided that the appointment will be made by the appointing authority concerned after clearance from Government of Manipur, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Personnel Division). Admittedly, when no approval has been given by the concerned department, the mere issuance of letter does not confer any right particularly when the stipulation is contained in the scheme itself, and there was a ban operating in respect of appointments.

7. In response, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that within the time period stipulated an application was filed in the year 1981, but there was no response. Finding no other alternative the respondent who was a minor at the time of his father s death applied afresh and State cannot take plea that the benefit cannot be extended.

8. The Government of Manipur, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Personnel Division) issued Office Memorandum dated 2nd of May, 1984. Said office Memorandum deals with appointment of son/daughter/real brother/real sister/wife/husband of Government servants who died in harness leaving behind his/her family in indignant circumstances.

9. Admittedly, the respondent s father died before the Office Memorandum came into operation. In the memorandum a time period is stipulated. Since the scheme itself was not in operation when the respondent s father died, the time stipulation as provided in the scheme would not be strictly applicable to the case of the respondent and any one seeking for relief thereunder has to at least move within the time stipulated commencing from the date of the order. Nevertheless, keeping in view at any rate the object for which such appointments which are also compassionate appointments are made the minimum requirement is that the request for appointment should be made as expeditiously as the circumstances warrant. It could not be brought to our notice whether there was any scheme in operation prior to the scheme of 1984 referred to above. As the appointments of such nature envisaged under the said scheme are made to tide over immediate difficulties, there is an inbuilt r