Compassionate appointments cannot be strictly upheld on the touchstone of Article 14 or 16 of the Constitution of India, and there must be a prevailing scheme for compassionate appointment at the time of the employee's death. It is not open for a person to approach the court several years after becoming eligible for compassionate appointment and seek a writ in the nature of mandamus.

Biswanath Somadder, J.

In Re: CAN 10514 of 2016

After considering the submission made by the learned advocate for the appellant and upon perusing the application for condonation of delay, it appears that sufficient cause has been shown to explain the delay in filing the appeal and as such the delay is condoned.

2. The application for condonation of delay, being CAN 10514 of 2016 is accordingly allowed.

In Re: MAT 1857 of 2016

With

CAN 10516 of 2016

3. By consent of the parties present, the appeal is treated as on day's list and taken up for consideration along with the application for stay.

4. The instant appeal preferred by the State of West Bengal arises out of the following order passed by the learned Single Judge on 30th June, 2016, while disposing of a writ petition, being WP 869 (W) of 2016:-

"A recommendation was made on 29th July, 2011 by the Baranagar Municipality recommending the name of the petitioner for compassionate appointment. It is submitted that this list was sent to the Director of Local Bodies. He has not taken any action in the last five years. So there is no question of any further waiting for the petitioner in terms of the waiting list.

The Secretary, Local self Government and the Director of Local Bodies will ensure that the petitioner is appointed in terms of the recommendation of the Baranagar Municipality, in any suitable post within eight weeks of communication of this order, which time limit is peremptory.

I also make it clear that if any circular prohibiting any compassionate appointment comes in the way, then the circular is to be followed. But the circular is not to be applied in respect of deaths occurring before the date of coming into force of the circular, as a valuable right had accrued before the circular became effective. The circular has and is to be given prospective effect.

All the papers are before this Court.

Affidavits were not invited. The allegations contained in the petition are deemed not to have been admitted.

This writ application is accordingly disposed of."

5. Even a bare perusal of the impugned order reveals that the learned Single Judge has issued a mandatory direction upon the Secretary, Local Self Government and the Director of the Local Bodies to appoint the writ petitioner on compassionate ground in terms of the recommendation made on 29th July, 2011, by the Baranagar Municipality, within a certain mandatory timeframe.

6. It is well settled that an applicant cannot claim appointment in a particular group/class of post as a matter of right. Appointment on compassionate ground too, cannot be claimed as a matter of right. There can be no quarrel with the settled legal proposition that a claim for appointment on compassionate ground is based on the premises that the applicant was dependent on the deceased employee. Strictly, such a claim cannot be upheld on the touchstone of Article 14 or 16 of the Constitution of India. However, such claim is considered as reasonable and permissible on the basis of sudden crisis occurring in the family of such employee who has served the State and dies while in service. As a rule, public appointments should be made strictly on the basis of open invitation of applications and merit. The appointment on compassionate ground is not another source of recruitment, but merely an exception to the aforesaid requirement, upon taking into consideration the fact of the death of the employee while in service leaving his family without any means of livelihood. In such cases, the object is to enable the family to get over sudden financial crisis and not to confer a status on the family. In this context, one may take notice of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Union of India & Anr. v. Shashank Goswami & Anr., reported in AIR 2012 SC 2294.

7. Further, in Mumtaz Yunus Mulani (Smt.) v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. reported in (2008) 11 SCC 384, the Supreme Court, while examining the scope of employment on compassionate ground, took into consideration a