Compassionate appointment is an exception to the general rule of appointment in public services and is in favor of the dependents of a deceased employee leaving the family in penury. The scheme must be implemented strictly, and large-scale compassionate appointments would result in infringement of the Fundamental Rights of eligible citizens aspiring to secure public employment through open competitive processes.

ORDER :

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

2. Perusal of the order impugned reveals that the application submitted by the mother of the writ petitioner was rejected and the writ petitioner submitted an application in the year 2016, after attaining the age of majority.

3. The petitioner states that his father late Mr.M.Pachaippan was employed in Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board on 05.11.2007, while he was in service. Admittedly, at the time of death of his father, the petitioner was a minor and therefore, he was not eligible for appointment on compassionate ground.

4. The mother of the writ petitioner submitted an application, seeking an appointment on compassionate ground on 23.07.2009 and the said application was not considered by the Competent Authorities. Since the mother was aged, thereafter, she has filed another application in the year 2016 to provide appointment for her son, who is the petitioner herein. The Authorities have rejected the application of the writ petitioner on the ground that second application for compassionate appointment is not entertainable as per the clarifications issued by the Government in its Letter dated 03.10.2013.

5. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner states that the mother of the writ petitioner submitted an application, within a period of three years and the Authorities have not considered the same immediately. However, on attaining the age of majority, the mother of the writ petitioner submitted another application to provide appointment for her son. The said application was also not considered and therefore, the petitioner is constrained to move the present writ petition.

6. The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents states that the application submitted on behalf of the writ petitioner is not entertainable, since it was submitted after a lapse of about 9 years from the date of death of the deceased employee. The application submitted by the mother was not pursued initially. The mother of the writ petitioner herself submitted second application to provide appointment on compassionate ground for her son and in such circumstances, the Authorities have not considered the case of the writ petitioner.

7. Scheme of compassionate appointment has to be implemented strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions stipulated. Compassionate Appointment Scheme, being a concession, cannot be extended after a lapse of many years. The very purpose and object of the Scheme is to mitigate the circumstances arising claimed as an absolute right. Scheme being an exception, cannot be expanded for the purpose of providing appointment on compassionate grounds in a larger manner. Large scale compassionate appointment would result in infringement of the Fundamental Rights of the eligible citizen, who all are aspiring to secure public employment through open competitive process.

8. Scheme of compassionate appointment being a concession, to be implemented in a restricted manner, so as to provide appointment only to the families, who all are genuinely in penurious circumstances and in this regard, the authorities competent are bound to conduct field inspections and ascertain the imminent circumstances, warranting an appointment on compassionate grounds. It is not as if one appointment is to be granted to the family of the deceased employee and it is not as if every legal heir can submit the application and thereafter, the appointment is to be considered.

9. Once an application is filed by any one of the legal heir of the deceased employee and the said legal heir became ineligible, it is not as if that other legal legal heir can submit an application irrespective of the length of time. In the event of entertaining such repeated applications for compassionate appointment, the very purpose and object of the scheme would be defeated.

10. The very p