Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Rohit Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 1413 of 2022
Decided On : 24-01-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge of compassionate appointment rejection (Para 2) |
| 2. argument for eligibility and vague order (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. direction for reasoned decision within timeframe (Para 5) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)
C.M.No.4092/2022
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.1413/2022
1. The matter has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 02nd September 2021 passed by the Respondent No.2 whereby the Petitioner's request for compassionate appointment was rejected. Petitioner also seeks a direction to the Respondents to consider the Petitioner for compassionate appointment arising from the demise of his father, who was serving the Respondent No. 1-CISF as a Head Constable.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that even though the Petitioner is eligible for compassionate appointment as per the extant provisions of "Scheme for Compassionate Appointment under Central Government" issued vide DoP&T OM dated 09th October 1998 and the amended OM dated 30th May 2013, yet the Respondents vide the non- reasoned impugned order dated 02nd September 2021, rejected the Petitioner's request for compassionate appointment.
4. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that it does not specify as to which DoP&T guidelines are not fulfilled in the present case. Consequently, the impugned order dated 02nd September, 2021 is set aside on the grounds that it is cryptic and vague.
5. Accordingly, the Respondent No.2 is directed to treat the present writ petition as a representation of the Petitioner and decide the same way of a reasoned order in accordance with law, within eight weeks. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition is disposed of. This Court clarifies that it has not commented on the merits of the controversy. The rights and contentions of all the parties are left open.
The Court established that administrative decisions regarding appointments must be clear and reasoned, ensuring transparency and accountability.
Compassionate appointment is a non-absolute concession rather than a fundamental right. It must be administered strictly according to defined eligibility schemes. Judicial intervention is limited to ....
Court directs consideration of compassionate appointment representation within two months without merits examination.
Administrative authorities must provide reasoned, non-cryptic orders for the denial of compassionate appointments and must substantively consider all applicable relaxation guidelines and factual evid....
Point of Law : compassionate appointment is not a matter of right, but must be governed by the terms on which the State lays down the policy of offering employment assistance to a member of the famil....
Compassionate appointment is not a right and must be pursued immediately after a financial crisis due to the death of the breadwinner; delays undermine the purpose of such provisions.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
