SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(All) 2422

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
AJAY BHANOT, J.
Simmi Kumari And Another - Petitioner 
Versus 
Union Of India And Others – Respondents
WRIT A. No. 4118 of 2025
Decided On : 05-04-2025 


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Rajesh Kumar Dubey
For the Respondents: A.S.G.I., Anoop Tiwari, Ashutosh Mani Tripathi, Siddharth Singhal.

Compassionate appointments must prioritize the financial condition of dependants over the employment status of other family members, ensuring immediate relief from financial destitution following an employee's death.

Headnote:(A) Rules for appointment on compassionate grounds - The impugned orders dated 18.10.2024 and 06.12.2024 were quashed for failing to disclose reasons and overlooking the financial condition of the petitioners as dependants of the deceased employee - The interpretation of rules must prioritize the financial crisis faced by the family - Non-application of mind to relevant considerations was evident. (Paras 2, 5, 7, 11)

(B) Compassionate appointments - The rationale for compassionate appointments is to provide immediate relief to dependants facing financial destitution post the employee's death - Employment of family members must be assessed in terms of their support to the dependants. (Paras 7, 9)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners, a daughter and wife of a deceased employee, sought appointment on compassionate grounds after the employee's death. The claim was rejected based on the employment status of another family member, despite assertions of financial dependency.

Findings of Court:
The court found the impugned orders to lack reasoning and consideration of the family's financial condition, thus quashing them and remitting the matter for reconsideration.

Issues: The main issues were whether the employment of a family member affects the claim for compassionate appointment and whether the authorities considered the family's financial condition.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the financial condition of the dependants must be a decisive factor in compassionate appointments, and mere employment of another family member does not automatically disqualify the application if they do not provide support.

Result: Writ petition allowed.

Table of Content
1. petitioners' claims for compassionate appointment based on family dependency. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. rules governing compassionate appointments require careful interpretation. (Para 5 , 6)
3. financial crisis assessment is essential for compassionate appointments. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. impugned orders lacked reasoning and relevant considerations. (Para 10 , 11)
5. orders quashed; matter remitted for reconsideration. (Para 12 , 13 , 14)

JUDGMENT :

(Ajay Bhanot, J.)

1. Heard Shri Rajesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Ashutosh Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 3 and Shri Anoop Tiwari, learned Central Counsel for the respondent No.1-Union of India.

2. By the impugned order dated 18.10.2024 the claim of the petitioner No.1 has been declined. The order dated 18.10.2024 is cryptic and does not disclose any reasons for invalidating the claim of the petitioner No.1 for grant of appointment on compassionate ground.

3. By the impugned order dated 06.12.2024 the application of the petitioner No.1 for grant of appointment on compassionate ground has been rejected on the footing that the son of the petitioner No.2 was gainfully employed in a bank.

4. The petitioner No.1 is the daughter and the petitioner No.2 is the wife of the deceased-employee respectively who died in harness on 19.05.2024. The petitioner No.2 submitted an application for appointment of her daughter (petitioner No.1) on compassionate grounds. An affidavit submitted by the petitioner No.2 in support of the application for appointment on compassionate grounds asserted that her son was working in the Punjab National Bank. According to the said affidavit, after his appointment the son had severed all connections with the family and was staying separately. The petitioner No.2 is dependant on her daughter (petitioner No.1). Both were dependants of the deceased employee.

5. The relevant rules governing the grant of appointment on compassionate grounds are extracted hereunder:

"21. RELAXATION IN FAVOUR OF NEAR RELATIVES OF AN EMPLOYEE WHO DIES WHILE IN SERVICE OR RETIRES AT LEAST 5 YEARS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF SUPERANNUATION:

(iii) The relaxations shall be admissible only where none of the members of the family - spouse, son or unmarried daughter - is gainfully employed. However, if the widow is already employed elsewhere in Private Sector she will be allowed to take up a job in the Corporation in Class III or Class IV Cadre commensurate with her qualifications if she opts for the same (Circular No. MPP&R Desk/ZD/3/2001 dated 29/12/2001). Further provided that the condition regarding gainful employment, shall not be applicable where it is established by documentary evidence that the death of the employee is caused by his/her employment.

Provided further that this provision is meant only to recognize the act of courage and bravery displayed by such an employee."

6. The rules for appointment on compassionate ground have to be interpreted in a manner that they achieve the aforesaid legislature as stated above.

7. The appointments on compassionate ground passed the test of constitutional validity by a slender margin. The sole justification to make compassionate ground appointments is that the dependants of the deceased employee face unforeseen financial destitution after the death of the latter and need urgent succour. Compassionate appointments are provided to the family to immediately tide over the sudden financial crisis so caused by the death of the employee. This feature alone constituted the kin of a deceased employee into one class and on this sole footing the rationale of compassionate ground appointments was justified by Constitutional Courts.

8. In this wake determination of the financial condition or financial crisis being faced by the family as a result of the death of the employee is thus a mandatory pre condition for appointment on compassionate grounds.

9. The scope of the aforesaid Rules has to be interpreted in light of the a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top