IMPORTANT POINT
Compassionate appointments must be sought promptly; significant delays negate claims as the urgency diminishes.

JUDGMENT :

N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.

Heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Dilip Mazumdar, learned Addl. Advocate General, Assam, assisted by Mr. R. Dhar, learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate; appearing on behalf of all the respondents.

2. The petitioner, herein, by way of instituting the present proceeding, has presented a challenge to the decision arrived at by the State Level Committee in its meeting held on 31.08.2022, towards rejecting her case for appointment on compassionate ground.

3. As projected in the writ petition, the mother of the petitioner Late Chayanara Begum, while working as a Lower Division Assistant in the establishment of the Block Development Officer, Paschim Mangaldoi Development Block, had died-in-harness on 25.09.2007. At the time of the death of her mother in harness, the petitioner was aged about 13 years. The petitioner, on attaining the age of majority and also on acquiring the MA qualification and D.El.Ed. qualification in the year 2018 and 2019, respectively, submitted an application on 01.09.2021, before the competent authority praying for consideration of her case for appointment on compassionate ground. The said application as preferred by the petitioner came to be placed before the jurisdictional District Level Committee on 31.12.2021, for consideration of her case for appointment on compassionate ground. The jurisdictional District Level Committee proceeded to forward the said application of the petitioner before the State Level Committee without any recommendation so made in her favour. Thereafter, the application as submitted by the petitioner came to be placed before the State Level Committee on 02.08.2022. The State Level Committee on noticing that the petitioner had applied for appointment on compassionate ground after a lapse of 13 years since the date of the death of her mother in harness; proceeded to reject the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground on the ground of delay so occasioning in the matter.

4. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has instituted the present proceeding before this Court.

5. The learned counsels appearing for the parties have reiterated the facts and circumstances as noticed hereinabove.

6. I have heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.

7. At the outset, it is to be noticed that the mother of the petitioner had died-in-harness on 25.09.2007 and the application for appointment on compassionate ground, came to be preferred by the petitioner only on 01.09.2021. The petitioner had become a major in the year 2012, as per her Date of Birth(DoB) recorded in her HSLC certificate(Annexure-1 to the writ petition). Accordingly, the application seeking appointment on compassionate ground, came to be preferred after around 9(nine) years from the date she had attained majority. Accordingly, the said application of the petitioner, would not mandate a consideration and by the time, the same was preferred; the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground, was rendered to be a stale one.

8. It is a settled position of law that public service appointment should be made strictly on the basis of open invitation of an application and on merits. The appointment on compassionate ground cannot be a source of recruitment. It is merely an exception to the requirement of law keeping in view the fact of the death of the employee while in service, leaving his family without any means of livelihood. In such cases, the object is to enable the family to get over the sudden financial crises. Such appointments on compassionate ground, therefore, have to be made in accordance with the Rules, Regulations, or, administrative instructions taking into consideration, the financial condition of the family of the deceased. The favourable treatment to the