SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(AP) 95

Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : P.VENKATRAMA REDDY, U.C.BENERJEE
Executive Officer, Venkateswara Swamy devasthanam, Dwaraka Tirumala, West Godavari Dist - Appellant
Versus
Metlapalli Seshalakshmi Srinivas - Respondent
Decided On : 02-16-98

Headnote:

Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious institutions and Endowments Act, 1987 – Section 35 – Order of appointment of a charitable religious institution – Short point for consideration in this appeal is in regard to the powers of the Commissioner of Endowments, Government of Andhra Pradesh, in regard to the issuance of an order of appointment of a charitable religious institution or endowment on compassionate grounds – Held, It appears that either in terms of the provisions of the statute or in the factual context or in terms of the Government Order, the action of the commissioner cannot by any stretch of imagination be said to be in accordance with law and as such invalid in law an in that view of the matter, the order of the learned single Judge, strictly speaking ,is liable to be set aside – However, in the special facts and circumstances of the matter in issue, we are not inclined at this juncture to set at naught the appointment of the Writ Petitioner – Facts apparent from the record reveal that the Executive Officer of Devasthanam did give effect to the order of the Commissioner, though passed contrary to law and sanction was also accorded for a post of Junior Assistant in order to accommodate the petitioner – Writ Petitioner joined the service and was assigned the duties of Jr. Assistant in August/ September, 1990 and has been working till now – If a sanctioned post is available and the exigencies of work in devasthanam requires continuance of the petitioner he shall be allowed to work as Junior Assistant in the appellant-Devasthanam – In such an event, the writ Petitioner must be treated to have been appointed only with effect from the date of the judgment of the learned single Judge i. e. ,from 1-3-1997. – Writ petitioner will not be entitled to claim the differential salary for the past period – There is no vacancy or the requirement for such job is not available, the Executive Officer is directed to communicate the same to the Commissioner and the Commissioner in his turn is directed to transfer him to appropriate Devasthanam where there is vacancy and job requirement – Writ Appeal Disposed of

UMESH CHANDRA BANERJEE, C. J.

( 1 ) THE short point for consideration in this appeal is in regard to the powers of the Commissioner of Endowments, Government of Andhra Pradesh, in regard to the issuance of an order of appointment of a charitable religious institution or endowment on compassionate grounds.

( 2 ) BEFORE dealing with the problem as such, it would be convenient to note the basic law in regard to the appointment on compassionate grounds. Be it noted that in the normal course of events all appointments should be made strictly on the basis of open invitation to the public at large so far as public services are concerned and appointments on compassionate grounds cannot but be termed to be an exception. The word compassion in common acceptation mean and imply fellow feeling or sorrow for the sufferings of another. Having due regard to the meaning to be attributd to the word compassion, it appears, therefore, that compassionate appointment cannot but mean to ameliorate the financial stringencies caused by the sudden death of a wage earner. It cannot possibly be deferred to any future point of time but to avoid immediate financial impact on the family, a compassionate appointment is made or given. Be it also noted here that this compassionate appointment cannot also be possibly made in contradistinction with the rules. It has to conform to the rules and regulations, otherwise the action cannot but be termed to be totally void by reason of adoptation of a procedure unknown as regards the rules of appointment are concerned. One word of caution ought to be introduced at this juncture to the effect that the claim for compassionate appointments cannot be termed to be a claim as a right of inheritance - there is no element of right involved on the part of the applicant but by reason of sudden pitiable conditions, the concerned authority having due regard to the factum of the services rendered by an employee who has died recently or immediate past on compassionate grounds so as to avoid a financial set-back, appoints the heir of the deceased.

( 3 ) THE view expressed as above finds support from the decision of the supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana vs. Rani Devi.

( 4 ) HAVING discussed the basic features of this compassionate appointment being the focal point for consideration here, let us advert to the factual score briefly herein below:- one Sri. M. V. K. Sarma entered into the service of Dwaraka Tirumala devasthanam as a Record Assistant in or about 1968 and subsequently promoted as Junior Assistant. The records depict that the said Sri Sarma, however, died whilst in service on 03-09-1983. The factual score record that the wife of the deceased was paid Rs. 228/- towards the family pension. The writ petitioner being the son of Sri M. V. K. Sarma, since deceased, was aged about 12 years at the time of the death. Records, however, further depict that the sister of the writ petitioner Smt. Seshu Kumari is a permanent employee of the devasthanam and her husband Sr. N. S. Raghu babi is also a permanent - employee of the Devasthanam. Be that as it may, it has been the definite practice of the Devasthanam that in the event of a compassionate appointment, the same should be made within a period of twelve (12) months from the date of the death of the employee concerned by reason of which such an appointment is made on compassionate grounds. The factual score, therefore, depicts that an employee died in the year 1983 and the widow of the employee draws a pension of Rs. 228/- per month, having the daughter and the son-in-law being employed at the Devasthanam and had a son who was aged 12 on the date of the death. This factual clarification is required in the contextual facts by reason of the factum of compassionate appointment being made by an authority which is otherwise not competent to make such appointment on comapssionate grounds after a lapse of more than seven (07) years.

( 5 ) THE factual matrix further depicts tha











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top