The main legal principle established in the judgment is that the paramount consideration in compassionate appointments is to mitigate the financial hardship faced by the families of deceased employees. The court emphasized the need for discretion in interpreting and applying the rules to provide relief to families in financial crisis.

Per Tejinder Singh Doabia J

1. Delay in the matter of making prayer and seeking compassion and compassionate appointment is pleaded as a bar as difficult to cross as the "Great Wall of China."

2. "Compassion" and "Reason" represent two diamatically opposite concepts. Where "compassion" has to be shown then "reason has to be in the back seat. Compassionate and compassion as the words are ordinarily understood, would signify a mental state of affair which give rise to a feeling and sympathy for sufferings of others. It represents an inclination to give aid or support or even show mercy.

3. Compassionate appointment as the term suggests is made by passing normal rules for entry into public service. Petitioners submit that this compassion can be shown at any time. Filing of belated application may be one of the criterion but ultimately, if the appointing authority feels that a person needs support then benovalance can be shown at any time. This is said to be the crux of the matter. Judicial precedents however vary depending upon the rules. Appointments have been allowed and disallowed on the plea of limitation. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeking compassionate appointment submit that what is required to be seen is the situation in which a person seeking compassionate appointment is placed. Counsel for the State however submit that an application seeking compassionate appointment should fall within the frame work of the rules and if there is delay then this delay would stand in the way of a person in getting appointment. Before noticing the Judicial precedents in this behalf the Rules on the subject be noticed.

4. Rules as applicable to State of Jammu and Kashmir J&K Employees (Death in Harness) Dependents Rule 1989 came to be enforce on 18th of May 1989. (SRO 194 was issued). Family consisting of son, daughter, adopted son, adopted daughter, wife, sister brother dependent upon the deceased, were eligible to seek compassionate appointment. Basis factor which was to guide in these appointments was to see that by these appointments the extreme hardship of the immediate family members of the deceased is mitigated. The person to be appointed was supposed to give an undertaking that he would look after the family. This was so provided in Rule 2 of the above rules. Income criteria was also prescribed. There was, however, no stipulation as to time limit within which the appointment was to be made.

5. On 24th of September 1989, Jammu and Kashmir Compassionate Appointment Rules 1991 came on the Statute Book. (This was vide SRO 283). New criteria was indicated. There was no time limit with in which this appointment was to be made. If the income of family was more than Rs. 2000/- then appointment was not to be offered. The rules which are now applicable are the Jammu and Kashmir Compassionate Appointment Rules of 1994. This is popularly known as SRO 43 pf 1994. Rule 3 of the rules provided that appointment was to be made to the lowest rank of non-gazetted service or to class IV post if the candidate had acquired qualification upto metric. Rule 3 is relevant and is reproduced below:

"3. Appointment under these rules: (1) Notwithstanding any thing contained in any rule or order for the time being in force regulating the procedure for recruitment in any service or posts under the Government an eligible family member or a person specified in Rule 2 may be appointed against a vacancy in the lowest rank of a non-gazetted service having qualification above Matriculation or to a class IV post if the candidate has read upto Metric.

Provided that the applicant is eligible and qualified or acquires eligibility and qualification within a period of six months from the death its of the deceased person specified in Rule 2.

(2) Nothing in sub-rule (1) shall derogate from the powers of the Government in General Administration Department to appoint at its discretion a candidate to a higher post in the non-gazetted service."

6. Income criteria was ind