Compassionate appointments are exceptions to normal recruitment procedures and must be made promptly to address immediate financial crises; delays undermine this objective.

Judgment & Order :

SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, J.

The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging, inter alia the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground which has been done by the District Level Committee (hereinafter DLC) in its meeting dated30.01.2014.

2. The projected case of the petitioner, in a nutshell is that his father, Harkumar Das, who was working as Assistant Carpenter in the Office of the Executive Engineer, Irrigation, Rangia Division had died in harness on 11.10.2010. The petitioner who claims to be eligible had applied for appointment on compassionate ground and for a long time was unaware of the outcome of such consideration and accordingly, he had sought information under the RTI Act. Thereafter, he came to know that the District Level Committee (DLC), Kamrup, in its meeting dated 30.01.2014 had recommended the name of the private respondent no. 5 by rejecting the case of the petitioner. It is this action, which is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition.

3. I have heard Shri A. Sarania, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard the Departmental Counsel and Shri AU Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the rejection of the candidature of the petitioner is unreasonable and arbitrary. It is contended that the respondent no. 5 was economically well off than the petitioner and the said aspect of financial condition was totally ignored by the DLC. It has also been averred that the family of the respondent no.5 already had a Government servant.

5. Per contra, the Departmental 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.

6. By endorsing the submission made by the Department, Shri Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 has drawn the attention of this Court to the affidavit-in-opposition filed on 08.01.2021. It is submitted that his client was duly considered and after the recommendation of the DLC, her case was considered by the SLC and thereafter, she has been duly appointed. It is submitted that there is no challenge to the said actions. It is also submitted that her husband was an employee on the said Office who had died in harness and she was the only woman candidate who was found most suitable.

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

8. The materials on record make it clear that the death of the husband of the petitioner was on 11.10.2010 and the rejection by the DLC was of the year 2014. The writ petition itself was instituted in the year 2018. While the challenge is structured on the allegation that the financial status of the respondent no. 5 was better than the petitioner, the said allegation has been disputed by the respondent no. 5 in the affidavit-in-opposition filed. The said aspect constitutes a factual dispute which is not liable to be gone into by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

9. There is another aspect of the matter with regard to the very objective of the scheme for compassion appointment. The very objective of the scheme, 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 15 years.

10. The law on compassionate appointment has been elaborately explained by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the recent case of State of West Bengal Vs. Debabrata Tiwari reported in (2023) SCC Online SC 219. In the said case, almost all the earlier cases on the subject of compassionate appointment have been discussed and the principles have been laid down. It has been reiterated that an appointment on compassionate ground is a departure from the normal rule and is an exc