IMPORTANT POINT
Compassionate appointments are intended for immediate relief and cannot be claimed after significant delays, as the sense of urgency is lost.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, J.

The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging, inter alia the non-consideration and appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground.

2. The projected case of the petitioner, in a nutshell is that his father, Akon Ali Mazumder, who was working as a Majdoor under the Commanding Officer, 57 Mountain Division of the Indian Army had died in harness on 10.07.2003. He left behind his wife and three minor children including the petitioner. The petitioner was stated to be a minor at the time of the death of his father. The petitioner had passed his H.S. examination and after attaining the age of majority, had submitted an application on 11.04.2009 praying for appointment on compassionate ground. On such application, certain documents were asked from the petitioner and thereafter, there was no action. The petitioner also claims to have submitted a representation dated 19.11.2015 followed by filing of the present writ petition.

3. I have heard Ms. L. Wazeeda, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard Shri SS Roy, learned CGC.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there was no negligence on his part in applying for appointment on compassionate ground. It is submitted that after the petitioner had attained majority and passed the H.S. examination, he could apply for the same. The process ought to have been taken to a logical conclusion which was not done and therefore, she submits that appropriate directions be issued for such consideration and appointment.

5. Per contra, Shri Roy, learned CGC has submitted 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 in the year 2003 and in the meantime, almost 22 years have passed and therefore, there is no requirement in law for such consideration.

6. The rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties have been duly considered.

7. The facts on record make it clear that the death of the father of the petitioner was on 10.07.2003 and the application was claimed to be made by the petitioner on 11.04.2009 after the petitioner had attained majority.

8. The law is well settled on the field of appointment on compassionate ground. It has been laid down that in a case where an applicant was a minor at the time of death of the Government servant, there is no requirement in law to wait for such consideration till such applicant attains majority. Further, in the instant case, as on today, about 22 years have passed since the date of death. It also appears from the note which been placed on record that there was indeed some action to consider the case of the petitioner at the relevant point of time. However due to want to documents the same did not materialise. Be that as it may, issuing a direction to consider now would not be in consonance with the scheme.

9. The very objective of appointment of compassionate ground, which is an exception to the general mode of recruitment is to give immediate succor to a family which has lost its sole breadwinner who was a Government servant and such objective would not survive after a gap of 22 years.

10. The Hon’ble supreme Court in the case of Sanjay Kumar Vs State of Bihar reported in (2000) 7 SCC 192 has laid down as follows:-

“ 3. We are unable to agree with the submissions of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner. This Court has held in a number of cases that compassionate appointment is intended to enable the family of the deceased employee to tide over sudden crisis resulting due to death of the breadearner who had left the family in penury and without any means of livelihood. In fact such a view has been expressed in the very dec