IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Mohit Kumar Shah, J.
Chandan Mallik S/o Late Mahendra Mallik – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar through its the Principal Secretary Urban Development and Housing Department and ors. – Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 17656 of 2022
Decided On : 23-04-2024
JUDGMENT :
Mohit Kumar Shah, J.
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 31.12.2007 passed by the then Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Purnea (now Nagar Nigam, Purnea), whereby and whereunder the services of the petitioner has been terminated.
2. The brief facts, according to the petitioner, are that the father of the petitioner was employee of Nagar Parishad, Purnea and was working as Safai Karamchari, however, he died in harness on 18.12.2001, whereafter the petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground as Daily Wager vide letter dated 01.09.2006, whereupon the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Purnea had issued an appointment letter dated 18.06.2007 and the petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground as safai Karamchari in the pay-scale of Rs. 775-1025/-, however, few months thereafter, the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Purnea, by the impugned memo dated 31.12.2007 has terminated the services of the petitioner.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that without granting any opportunity to the petitioner to put forth his defence, the impugned order dated 31.12.2007 has been passed, hence the same is fit to be set aside, being in violation of the principles of Natural Justice.
4. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 2 i.e. the Municipal Commissioner, Purnea Municipal Corporation, Purnea has submitted that the father of the petitioner Late Satto Mehtar died in harness on 18.12.2001, while working as Safai Karamchari in the Nagar Nigam, Purnea, however, at that time the mother of the petitioner namely Bugiya Mehtarni was in service of the Nagar Nigam, Purnea and this fact was concealed by the petitioner from the respondents while applying for appointment on compassionate ground, leading to issuance of letter dated 18.06.2007, whereby and whereunder the petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground. Nonetheless, subsequently it came to the notice of the respondent-authorities that the mother of the petitioner was in service, hence the then Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Purnea (now Nagar Nigam, Purnea) had immediately issued letter dated 31.12.2007 recalling the previous letter dated 18.06.2007, whereby the petitioner had been appointed on compassionate ground, in view of the circular issued by the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Govt. of Bihar, dated 05.10.1991, which postulates that if both wife and husband are in government service/public service, then after the death of any one of them, no appointment on compassionate ground shall be permissible to any children of the deceased employee. Thus, it is submitted that there is no illegality in the impugned order dated 31.12.2007. It is further submitted that even otherwise appointment on compassionate ground is a concession and not a right. In this connection, reliance has been placed on a judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Anusree K.B., reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1331, paragraphs no. 15 and 16 whereof are being reproduced herein below:-
“(i) that the compassionate appointment is an exception to the general rule;
(ii) that no aspirant has a right to compassionate appointment;
(iii) the appointment to any public post in the service of the State has to be made
C. Jacob vs. Director of Geology & Mining & Anr.
Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply & Sewerage Board & Others vs. T.T.Murali Babu
Naresh Kumar vs. Department of Atomic Energy & Others
P. S. Sadasivaswamy vs. State of Tamil Nadu
State of Jammu & Kashmir vs. R.K. Zalpuri & Others
State of Tamil Nadu vs. Seshachalam
State of Uttranchal & Anr. Vs. Shiv Charan Singh Bhandari & Ors.
Compassionate appointments are concessions, not rights; delay in filing petitions undermines legal claims.
Compassionate appointment claims are contingent on urgency; significant delays may render applications stale and unjustified, nullifying the relief sought.
Compassionate appointment claims must be considered promptly; significant delays can negate the urgency required, making applications stale.
Delay in pursuing a claim for compassionate appointment disqualifies entitlement to relief, as significant delays suggest the absence of immediate financial need.
Compassionate appointments must be considered promptly to address immediate financial crises; undue delay can render applications stale and ineligible.
Compassionate appointment is intended for immediate relief in case of death of a breadwinner, and applications must be timely; delays undermine claims for such appointments.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.