Compassionate appointment cannot be claimed as a matter of right and should be made in accordance with the rules, regulations, or administrative instructions, considering the financial condition of the family of the deceased.

JUDGMENT :

Sri. S.N. Prasad, J. - The petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 20.3.2004 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar in O.A. No. 1676 of 2002 is before this Court by which the relief sought for by the petitioner for his appointment on compassionate ground under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme has been rejected.

2. The brief fact of the case of the petitioner is that he being the 4th son of Late Dandapani Behera, who while serving as peon had died in harness on 19.9.1993. The petitioner being the 4th son had made an application for getting appointment on compassionate ground under the provisions of the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme. The matter was examined by different functionaries of the State posted in the district and submitted a report on 22.6.1996, but when no action was taken, the petitioner filed one Original Application being O.A. No. 2525 of 1997, which was disposed of vide order dated 10.11.2001 directing the authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment in Class-IV post under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme. In pursuance to the aforesaid order of the learned Tribunal, the Tahasildar Berhampur has issued a letter on 14.1.2002 and thereafter inquiry was conducted for ascertaining the annual income of the family members of the deceased employee and it was found that the total income of the deceased family from all sources was Rs.53,004/- during the year 1995 and on that basis the authorities have passed order holding the petitioner not entitled to get the benefit under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme vide order passed in this regard on 26.4.2002. The petitioner being aggrieved with the said order, has again approached the Orissa Administrative Tribunal vide O.A. No. 1676 of 2002, which is the subject matter in the present writ petition, but the claim of the petitioner has been rejected. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition on the ground that the authorities while rejecting his claim has not taken into consideration the provisions of Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme, which has been formulated to give immediate relief to the distress family, but without taking into consideration, the claim of the petitioner has been rejected merely on the ground of financial viability.

3. Learned counsel representing the opposite party-State vehemently opposed the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner and has submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to get the benefit of Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme for the reason that the appointment on compassionate ground cannot be made the alternative way to get appointment by snatching the right of legitimate candidate, who is to get appointment by participating in a regular recruitment process by following the principle of Article 16 of the Constitution of India. He submits that the State has formulated Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme to provide immediate relief to the distress family so that the bereaved family may not face hardship in getting bread and butter due to the sudden demise of the bread earner. He submits that the authorities have examined the financial viability of the deceased family to ascertain whether the family of the deceased employee is in need of appointment by way of mercy and in course of examination, it was found that the family of the deceased employee was financially viable and hence, came to the conclusion that the family does not require help under the provisions of the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme and accordingly, rejected the claim of the petitioner.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record.

5. There is no dispute about the fact that the State Government has come up with Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme for providing appointment on compassionate ground for the dependent of the deceased employee to provide immediate relief due to the sudden demise of the bread earner. It is also not in dispute that the appointment on