Compassionate employment is an exception to the general rule of equality enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It can only be granted in accordance with the rules prescribed by the government or public authority concerned and must be provided immediately to the family of the deceased employee.

( 1 ) WRIT-PETITIONER-RESPONDENT s father was working as Supervisor in the establishment of the appellant when he died on 7-10-86 in harness leaving behind the son (writ petitioner) who was then only about 12 years old. After a lapse, however, of 8 years, i. e. , after obtaining the age of 19 years plus, he sought appointment on compassionate ground in lieu of his father who had died in harness. The appellants however, delayed any decision on the same. In the writ petition they however, state that his application was rejected on 8-11-94 as his request cannot be considered under the rules since it was time barred. Learned single Judge, however, has ordered as follows:"the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this circumstance stood in the way of the consideration of the petitioner s case as a blanket rule of two years cannot be regarded as a matter of course in this case. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that if the petitioner was a minor at the time of death nothing prevented the petitioner s mother to seek for employment and it is now too late for the consideration of the said application. I am unable to accept this contention because obviously the spouse was not in a position to get an employment perhaps due to the fact that she was not educated and has waited for her son to grow up and become qualified for appointment. The rule of two years in respect of minors is arbitrary where minor children would not become majors within two years. Simply because the minor son of the deceased was too young to apply for appointment at that time, it is not possible to deny him that chance for ever. "

( 2 ) AGGRIEVED by the aid directions this appeal has been preferred by the appellant-employer.

( 3 ) THE point for consideration in this appeal, therefore, is whether the application of writ petitioner-respondent for appointment on compassionate grounds could be considered after a lapse of 8 years after the death of his father. The rules prescribe that the application for employment on compassionate grounds should be made immediately and in case where the child of the deceased was a minor or had not attained educational qualifications a reasonable time for seeking employment was stipulated as two years from the date of demise of the employee.

( 4 ) ARTICLE 14 of the Constitution of India guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws to every person. Article 16 of the Constitution of India provides for equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office or to promotion from one office to a higher office under the State. Article 16, thus, gives effect to the doctrine of equality under Article 14 and prohibition of discrimination under Article 15 (1) of the Constitution of India. These three articles form part of a string of constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights and they supplement each other. Clause (2) of Article 16 of the Constitution of India guarantees that no citizen shall on ground only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence or any of them be discriminated against in respect of any employment or office under the State. Therefore where there is discrimination on the ground of only descent this clause will come into play. Granting preference in favour of sons or near relations in matters of employment by the state or its instrumentalities has been considered void after the commencement of the Constitution as it is discriminatory on the ground of descent.

( 5 ) WHILE considering the principle, why a compassionate ground appointment would be permissible notwithstanding the guarantee under article 16 of the Constitution of India to afford equality of opportunity of employment, the Supreme Court in "yogender Pal Singh vs. Union of India " has observed:"while it may be permissible to appoint a person who is the son of a police officer who dies in service or who is incapacitated while rendering s