IMPORTANT POINT
Compassionate appointment should be provided immediately to mitigate the hardship due to the death of the bread earner in the family, and it must be relative to the financial condition and hardship faced by the dependents of the deceased government employee.

ORDER :

1. This writ petition has been filed for compassionate appointment and also to set aside the impugned orders/letters dated 5.1.2011, 17.1.2011 & 10.4.2012.

2. Father of the petitioner namely Lambadi Malaiya was posted as Peon under the respondent No.1/department, who died in harness on 26th October, 2006. The petitioner had filed an application for grant of compassionate appointment on 24.11.2006 along with relevant documents. Respondent No.3 vide letter dated 5.1.2007 forwarded the case of the petitioner to respondent No.2 for necessary action. As the post was not vacant in respondent No.1/department, respondent No.3 obtained consent of the petitioner for compassionate appointment on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III and thereafter respondent No.3 again sent the case of the petitioner to respondent No.2 for necessary action. Respondent No.2 wrote a letter to respondent No,.6 on 4.2.2008 for providing compassionate appointment to the petitioner on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III under the Janpad Panchayat Bhopalpattnam, but all such correspondences went in vain. Thereafter, the Collector, vide letter dated 5.1.2011 rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that his application was not forwarded by his parent department for compassionate appointment within limitation and as per the policy, the application was time barred, as it has been received after more than 3 years. The same was communicated to the petitioner vide letters dated 17.1.2011 (Annexure-P/9) & 20.1.2012 (Annexure-P/10). Hence this petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed the application for compassionate appointment well within limitation on 24.11.2006 and there was no fault on the part of the petitioner. Neither the petitioner nor any other family members has been gainfully employed and they are facing acute financial crisis to earn their livelihood after the death of the deceased employee. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the department itself has not forwarded the application of the petitioner well within time and the application has not been decided by the competent authority as per the policy. Therefore, learned counsel prays to allow the petition.

4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel submits that in the absence of vacant post, a candidate is not entitled to be considered for compassionate appointment. He submits that the said issue directly came before this Court in WPS No.627/2012 (Smt. Vimla Diwan & Another Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others, decided on 23.11.2015).

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents annexed with the writ petition with utmost circumspection.

6. In the matter of Smt. Sushma Gosain and others v. Union of India and others, (1989) 4 SCC 468, the Supreme Court directed for creation of supernumerary post in absence of any vacant post by observing in paragraph 9 as under: -

“9. We consider that it must be stated unequivocally that in all claims for appointment on compassionate grounds, there should not be any delay in appointment. The purpose of providing appointment on compassionate ground is to mitigate the hardship due to death of the bread earner in the family. Such appointment should, therefore, be provided immediately to redeem the family in distress. It is improper to keep such case pending for years. If there is no suitable post for appointment supernumerary post should be created to accommodate the applicant.”

7. Similarly, in the matter of Himachal Road Transport Corporation v. Shri Dinesh Kumar, (1996) 4 SCC 560, the Supreme Court has said that in absence of vacancy, grant of appointment would be misuse of public funds which is totally unauthorized, by observing as under :

“In the absence of a vacancy it is not open to the Corporation to appoint a person to any post. It will be a gross abuse of the powers of a public authority to appoint persons when vacancies are not available. If persons are so ap