IMPORTANT POINT
Compassionate appointments are not vested rights and must be considered promptly to address immediate financial crises; delays diminish the urgency of such claims.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, J.

The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed with a claim for appointment on compassionate ground.

2. The projected case of the petitioner, in a nutshell is that his father, Bhraman Kanta Deb, who was working as UD Assistant in the Office of the Superintendent Engineer, PWD (Roads), Cachar had died in harness on 12.08.2010. The petitioner who claims to be eligible had applied for appointment on compassionate ground which, however was rejected on the ground of delay in applying. The petitioner had thereafter approached this Court by filing WP(C)/4148/2013 which was disposed of vide order dated 16.12.2014 by interfering with the rejection order and with a direction to the District Level Committee (DLC) for consideration as one time measure. The DLC in its meeting dated 07.04.2015 had reconsidered the case of the petitioner and recommended the same. The State Level Committee (SLC) however in its meeting dated 31.12.2018 had rejected the claim of the petitioner mainly on two grounds- (i) not within 5% quota and (ii) under qualified.

3. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner had once again approached this Court by filing WP(C)/1654/2019 which was disposed of vide order dated 15.03.2019 directing a consideration of the case of the petitioner in terms of Paragraph 15 of the OM dated 01.06.2015. The matter was accordingly reconsidered by the SLC in its meeting dated 23.12.2019 and the application was rejected on 4 grounds- (i) applicant does not have required educational qualification, (ii) the deceased employee had less than 3 years of service remaining, (iii) he cannot be accommodated in any Division in Assam and (iv) his application was pending for recommendation for more than two years. It is the aforesaid decision which is a subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition.

4. I have heard Shri YS Mannan, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard Shri R. Dhar, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned decision is unsustainable in law and not in consonance with the previous directions and orders of this Court in the earlier proceedings. It is submitted that this Court in the first order dated 16.12.2014 had interfered with the aspect of alleged delay in submitting the application and by the second order dated 15.03.2019 had directed consideration as per paragraph 15 of the OM dated 01.06.2015. However, the same aspects have again been taken into consideration for rejecting the claim of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner is not at fault for the delay which has been caused in the meantime.

6. Per contra, Shri Dhar, learned State Counsel has submitted that the reasons cited for rejecting the case of the petitioner are relevant and germane and therefore, the submission that there is illegality cannot be countenanced. He submits that though the consideration in the impugned decision regarding delay may not be relevant, there are three other considerations including the aspect of accommodating in any other Division as per paragraph 15 of the OM dated 01.06.2015 and based on that, the decision has been taken. He further submits that the objective of the scheme for appointment on compassionate ground is to give immediate relief to a bereaved family which has lost its sole bread winner, who was a Government servant. It is submitted in the instant case that the death was on 12.08.2010 and in the meantime, more than 14 years have passed and therefore, there is no requirement in law for such consideration. He has also submitted that affidavit-in-opposition was filed by the respondent no. 1 on 29.11.2021. He has also submitted that after 2017, the scheme for compassionate appointment has been stopped and presently, there is a scheme for compassionate family pension in appropriate cases. He has also referred