Compassionate appointment is an act of grace granted to alleviate immediate financial distress following a sudden death. Eligibility, including defined family status, must be established as of the date of the employee's death, and cannot be acquired through subsequent life events.

JUDGMENT :

ABDHESH KUMAR CHAUDHARY, J.

1. The present Special Appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 interdicting an order dated 18.09.2025, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ-A No. 10799 of 2025 ( Smt. Deepika Tiwari vs. State of U.P. and others ), whereby her claim for compassionate appointment in the capacity of a widowed daughter-in-law of the deceased government employee was dismissed.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, admittedly one Smt. Sangeeta Bajpayee was working as an Assistant Teacher in Nari Shiksha Niketan Inter College, Chakbast Road, District Lucknow and she died in harness on 23.04.2021. The said Smt. Sangeeta Bajpayee was survived by two legal heirs namely (i) Uday Bhan Bajpayee – husband, who was a pensioner from U.P.P.C.L. and (ii) Nikhil Bajpayee - Son and unemployed.

3. After around two years, Nikhil Bajpayee, the son of the deceased government employee, filed an application staking his claim for appointment on compassionate ground vide his application dated 09.02.2023 and records reveal that the said application came to be rejected by the competent authority on 10^th of April, 2023 on the ground that his father (husband of the deceased Sangeeta Bajpayee) was a pensioner in U.P.P.C.L.

4. In the interregnum, the son of the deceased Government employee, i.e. Nikhil Bajpayee married the appellant on 15^th February 2023.

5. Unfortunately, Sri Nikhil Bajpayee left for his heavenly abode on 13^th of May, 2023 and admittedly by that date he did not challenge his rejection to be appointed on compassionate ground and as such the said order of rejection has till date remained unchallenged.

6. Subsequently, the appellant vide an Application dated 04.06.2024 staked her claim for compassionate appointment in the capacity of being the ‘widowed daughter-in-law’ of Late Sangeeta Bajpayee, however, her stake was rejected by the competent authority, leading to filing of a Writ Petition No. 4738 of 2024 (say First Writ Petition). A Single bench of this Court vide an order dated 19.06.2024, disposed of the said petition by directing the respondents to consider the representation of the appellant, which came to be rejected vide an order dated 10.10.2024 primarily on the ground that her father-in-law i.e. husband of the deceased government employee Late Sangeeta Bajpayee, was drawing pension from U.P.P.C.L.

7. Obviously, the appellant was not happy with the said rejection order and as such laid her challenge before this Court in Writ-A No. 10461 of 2024 (say second Writ Petition), wherein Single Judge of this Court, while quashing the said order of rejection directed the competent authority to consider the claim of the Appellant afresh, keeping in view the judgment of Kumari Farha Naseem Vs. State of U.P. and Others, 2024:AHC:154724 and Kr. Vanshika Nigam Vs. State of U.P. and Others in Special Appeal Defective No. 73 of 2016 of this Court, which held that claim for compassionate appointment may not be rejected merely because of one of the spouses is drawing pension and also held that the adequacy of the means and resources available and the issue of dependency have to be considered by the competent authority, while granting or rejecting the claim of compassionate appointment.

8. The Respondent No.3 (D.I.O.S.), in vie