Compassionate appointment is an exception and a concession, not an absolute right, and should be made strictly in accordance with the rules. The purpose of the scheme is to mitigate the circumstances arising from the sudden death of an employee, and lapse of time can be a ground to reject the application for compassionate appointment.

JUDGMENT :

S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.

Prayer: Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the impugned proceedings O. Mu. No. 280/a1/2012 dated 24.1.2013 made in pursuance of O. Mu. No. 07608/A5/2012 dated 31.12.2012 on the file of the 3rd respondent and quash the same and consequently direct respondents 1 to 3 to grant employment on compassionate ground to petitioner herein.

1. The order of rejection, rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner for compassionate appointment is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2. The petitioner states that his parents Ayyavoo and Sakunthala were working as Head Master and Teacher respectively in a Government School at Salem. The petitioner has got one elder sister and three younger sisters. The mother of the writ petitioner Smt. Sakunthala died on 26.01.1984 and his father Mr. Ayyavoo died on 07.03.1997, while he was in service. The petitioner states that both his parents died during their service as Teacher and Headmaster. Initially, the elder sister of the writ petitioner Smt. A. Kalaiselvi submitted a representation to the 4th respondent on 09.10.1997 to provide compassionate appointment. However, the representation was not considered by the third respondent and the Government imposed ban on appointment during the year 2001. The ban was in force for about 5 years till 2006 and thus, the representation of the petitioner's sister was not considered.

3. The petitioner submitted an application on 06.02.2006 to provide appointment on compassionate grounds. The said representation was rejected by the 2nd respondent on 31.12.2012 on the ground that he has not made application within a period of three years from the date of death of the deceased employee. Therefore, the application cannot be entertained with reference to the terms and conditions of the scheme of compassionate appointment. The said rejection order is under challenge in the present writ petition.

4. Lapse of time would also provide a ground to draw a factual inference that the penurious circumstances aroused on account of the sudden death of an employee became vanished. Thus, Courts have repeatedly held that compassionate appointment cannot be granted after several years. It is not as if the scheme is contemplated to provide one appointment to the family of the deceased employee.

5. Scheme of compassionate appointment is in violation of the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Scheme being violative of the equality clause enunciated under the Constitution, it is to be implemented strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions. All appointments are to be made strictly in accordance with the rules. Compassionate appointment is an exception and a concession. Scheme of compassionate appointment is not an absolute right, so also, concession can never be claimed as a matter of right. Excess appointment on compassionate ground would result in inefficiency in public administration. No selection is conducted. Rule of reservation has not been followed. Merit assessments are not made. That exactly is the reason why the Courts have held that the scheme of compassionate appointment is a concession and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. No selection procedures are followed for such compassionate appointments, the scheme is restricted by the Government itself in order to provide appointment only to the eligible candidates, who all are able to establish the genuinity to claim compassionate appointment.

6. This Court is of the considered opinion that appointments on compassionate grounds are streamlined by the Government, so as to provide appointment only on genuine grounds. Even any one of the legal heirs are employed in Government service or in private service and an earning member, then the family of the deceased employee is not eligible for Compassionate appointment.

7. In the present case, the father of the wri