Compassionate appointments are exceptions to equality in public employment and must adhere to strict eligibility criteria; initial rejection of application precludes further claims.

JUDGMENT :

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.

The respondents have rejected the compassionate employment case of the petitioner, hence the writ petition.

2. Facts

2(i) Petitioner’s father Sh. Surinder Kumar was in regular service of the respondent-Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Limited. He died in harness on 16.09.2011 while serving as Sub-Station Attendant in the trade of Electrician.

2(ii) Petitioner applied for employment assistance against the post of Clerk on compassionate grounds on 19.02.2013 (Annexure P-3). Respondents through their communication dated 17.05.2013 (Annexure P-4) rejected the case with the observations that (i) Petitioner being matriculate did not fulfill the eligibility criteria for the post of Clerk applied for by him and (ii) Certificate of income produced by the petitioner showed his annual family income of Rs.1,44,000/-, which exceeded the annual ceiling limit of Rs.75,000/- fixed under the applicable rules/instructions for providing employment under the Employment Assistance Scheme. Copy of the communication was also addressed to the petitioner.

2(iii) Petitioner once again sought employment, now under the Employment Assistance Scheme 2019 vide his application dated 17.09.2020. This application was eventually rejected by the respondents. The reason for rejection as supplied to the petitioner under the Right to Information Act, 2005 on 16.11.2022 (Annexure P-11) is that he was not a bonafide Himachali and therefore not eligible under the provisions/instructions of recruitment for Class III and IV post in the State of Himachal Pradesh. Petitioner feeling aggrieved against rejection of his case by the respondents on the ground of his being not a bonafide Himachali, has instituted this writ petition seeking following substantive relief:-

“That the impugned order conveyed to the petitioner under Right to Information Act on 19.11.2022, Annexure P-11 rejecting the case of the petitioner on the sole ground that he is not bonafide Himachali may be quashed and set aside and the respondents may be directed to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground from the date his counterpart/juniors were appointed with all consequential benefits.”

3. Submissions

3(i) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the reason given by the respondents for rejecting petitioner’s case seeking employment on compassionate ground has already been held untenable & rejected in Sandeep Kaur Vs. State of H.P. & Ors., CWP No. 4304/2023 decided on 26.0.2023,Following paras from the decision were pressed into service:-

“19) As regards the contention of the respondents that the petitioner should provide a certificate of Bonafide Resident of Himachal Pradesh is concerned, the petitioner has contended that though initially Himachal Pradesh, Manipur and Tripura Public Employment (Requirement As To Residence) Rules, 1954 were in force in the State of Himachal Pradesh which required production of such certificates, these Rules were deleted by the State Government after 20.04.1974.

20) It is further contended that insistence on such a certificate would violate Article 16(2) of the Constitution of India and even the main clauses of the policy dt. 07.03.2019 being relied on by the respondent do not require such a Bonafide Himachali Certificate.

21) We agree with both these contentions raised by the petitioner’s Counsel. As per Art.16(2) of the Constitution no citizen can be discriminated on basis of residence. So insisting that petitioner produces such a certificate when it is undisputed that she is an Indian citizen and daughter of the deceased employee of the 2nd respondent cannot be countenanced.

22) For all these aforesaid reasons, this Writ petition is allowed; the action of the respondents in refusing to give the petitioner compassionate appointment in the 2nd respondent- Corporation vide letter dt. 07.06.2023 (Annexure P-5) is set aside; the respondents are directed to accept the Character Certificate issued to the petitioner by the Senior Superintend