Back
PANKAJ BHATIA
Vivek Pandey – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging rejection of compassionate appointment (Para 1) |
| 2. reliance on prior judgment for support (Para 2) |
| 3. setting aside impugned order and next steps (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
Pankaj Bhatia, J.
The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 31.12.2018 whereby the request of the petitioner for grant of appointment on compassionate ground was rejected.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the judgment of this Court in the Case of Smt. Manjeet Kaur v. State of U.P. and another, Writ - A No.2615 of 2023, decided on 05.04.2023.
3. Accordingly, on the same ground, the present writ petition is also allowed. The impugned order dated 31.12.2018 is set aside. The respondents are directed to decide the claim of the petitioner in the light of the directions given by this Court vide order dated 05.04.2023 passed in Writ - A No.2615 of 2023.
Compassionate appointments must adhere to the eligibility criteria existing at the time of the employee's death, and retrospective application of new rules is not permissible.
The Court established that administrative decisions regarding appointments must be clear and reasoned, ensuring transparency and accountability.
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 who left his family in penury. The appointment....
Compassionate appointment is not a right and must be pursued diligently; significant delays can undermine the claim.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
