IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.
Bidyadhar Hazong, S/o. Late Rabindra Nath Roy @ Rabindra Nath Hazong – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Assam, Represented By The Chief Secretary-Cum-Chairman, State Level Committee, Government of Assam And Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) No.7063 of 2023
Decided On : 19-04-2024
Compassionate Appointment - Appointment on Compassionate Grounds - 2023 SCC OnLine SC 219 - The judgment discusses the principles of compassionate appointment and emphasizes the need for immediate action to address the financial crisis faced by the family of the deceased employee. It highlights that compassionate appointment is not a source of recruitment and cannot be claimed or offered after a lapse of time. The judgment also emphasizes the importance of the financial condition of the family at the time of the employee's death and the need for a sense of immediacy in considering such appointments.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought direction for appointment on compassionate grounds following the death of his father, an Assistant Teacher. The petitioner's application for compassionate appointment was made in 2003, and the writ petition was filed in 2023. The court noted the lack of pursuit of the matter by the petitioner and his family members after the initial application.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the sense of immediacy for compassionate appointment was lost due to the prolonged delay in pursuing the matter, and the financial crisis faced by the petitioner's family had already been overcome. As a result, the court dismissed the writ petition, stating that it was devoid of merit.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner's claim for appointment on compassionate grounds should be considered, given the prolonged delay and the petitioner's family's ability to sustain themselves without such appointment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principles of compassionate appointment as outlined in the 2023 SCC OnLine SC 219 case, emphasizing the need for immediate action to address the financial crisis faced by the family of the deceased employee. It also highlighted that compassionate appointment cannot be claimed or offered after a lapse of time and that the financial condition of the family at the time of the employee's death is a primary consideration.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, stating that it was devoid of any merit and ordered no costs to be paid.
Heard Ms. M. K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mrs. D. Das Barman, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 4. Also heard Mr. B. Talukdar, learned Standing counsel, Elementary Education appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 5.
2. The petitioner by way of instituting the present proceedings prayed for a direction upon the Respondent authorities to place his case before the District Level Committee for consideration of his case for appointment on compassionate grounds and thereafter basing on the said recommendation to appoint him against a post commensurating to his educational qualification on compassionate grounds.
3. As projected in the writ petition, the father of the petitioner namely Shri Rabindra Nath Roy @ Rabindra Nath Hazong (since deceased) while serving as an Assistant Teacher in Joyrampur M.E. School had died in harness on 21.10.2002. The petitioner being eligible had thereafter vide an application dated 03.01.2003 approached the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Education Department praying for appointment on compassionate grounds. The petitioner had also submitted an application with all requisite particulars before the Block Elementary Education Officer, Dhemaji on the same date.
4. The application as submitted by the petitioner before the Commissioner and Secretary, Government of Assam, Education Department vide a communication dated 17.06.2005 was forwarded to the District Elementary Education Officer, Dhemaji for processing of the same in terms of the policy in place.
5. It is the contention of the petitioner that in spite of the direction from the Government vide the communication dated 17.06.2005 for processing of his case for appointment on compassionate grounds, the respondent authorities have not acted in the matter in terms with the policy and accordingly being aggrieved, the present proceedings have been instituted.
6. A perusal of the materials available on record including the pleadings of the petitioner reveals that the father of the petitioner had died in harness on 21.10.2002 and thereafter an application was filed by the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds on 03.01.2003. It is seen from the pleadings as brought on record that the petitioner was not aware anything as to how the matter was pursued by the petitioner and/or his family members after submission of the said application on 03.01.2003. The present writ proceedings were instituted on 06.12.2023. However in the writ petition, there is no mention as to in what manner the petitioner had pursued the matter w.e.f. 04.01.2003 till 06.12.2023.
7. It is a settled position of law that compassionate appointment is an exception to the General Rule that appointment to any public post in the service of the State has to be made on the basis of principle which accord with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Dependents of a deceased employee of the State are made eligible by virtue of the policy on compassionate appointment. The basis of the policy is that it recognizes that a family of a deceased employee may be placed in a position of financial hardship upon the untimely death of the employee while in service. It is the immediacy of the said need which furnishes the basis for the State to allow the benefit of compassionate appointment. The terms on which such application would be considered are subject to the policy which is framed by the State. In that sense, it is well settled principle of law that there is no right to compassionate appointment.
8. It is well settled by the decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court that the object of grant of compassionate appointment being to enable the family to get over the financial crisis which it faces at the time of the death of the sole breadwinner, compassionate appointment cannot be claimed and/or offered after lapse of considerable amount of time and after the crisis is overcome. Appointm
Moon Mills Ltd. v. M. R. Meher, President, Industrial Court, Bombay
State of M.P. v. Nandlal Jaiswal
Compassionate appointment is not a source of recruitment and cannot be claimed or offered after a lapse of time. The financial condition of the family at the time of the employee's death is a primary....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the claim for compassionate appointment cannot be entertained after a considerable period of time since the death of the government employe....
Compassionate appointment is not a source of recruitment, should be provided immediately, and is based on the financial condition of the family at the time of the employee's death.
Compassionate appointments must be made promptly to address financial distress; significant delays render claims stale and ineligible for consideration.
Compassionate appointments are time-sensitive and must be made without undue delay to address financial distress; stale claims will not be entertained as needs may change over time.
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.