Back
VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
Manoj Gurjar, S/o. Late Shri Champa Lal Gurjar – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER :
Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.
The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 1-12-2018 and 28-1-2019 (Annexure P/1 and P/2) by which the respondent No. 3 has rejected the claim of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment on account of death of the father, who died in harness on 15-9-2015.
2. This is second visit of the petitioner before this Court. Earlier the petitioner filed petition WP No. 5230/2016(s) challenging the orders dated 4-1-2016 and 11-1-2016 by which the respondents have rejected the claim for compassionate appointment and awarded Rs. 2 lakh as a compensation in lieu of the appointment.
3. The facts of the case are that father of the petitioner was working as a Peon as a contingency establishment. He died on 15-9-2015. He was appointed as a Peon under the permanent employment as daily wager employee. Thereafter his services were regularised on 28-2-2009. The petitioner submitted an application for compassionate appointment on 7-1-2016. The same was rejected on the ground that there is no provision for compassionate appointment to an employee of work charged and contingency establishment. The dependen
Compassionate appointment claims are governed by the policy in effect at the time of the employee's death, and subsequent circulars may apply retroactively.
Compassionate employment is granted on humanitarian grounds and is not a vested right. The policy prevailing at the time of the deceased employee's death is crucial for determining compassionate appo....
The applicable policy for compassionate appointment is the one in force at the time of the employee's death, not the date of application filing.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the policy regarding compassionate appointment and the applicability of subsequent amendments to the case of the petitioner.
The compassionate appointment policy must be applied based on the conditions at the time of the employee's death, not retrospectively.
Claim for compassionate appointment must be decided only on the basis of relevant scheme prevalent on date of demise of employee and subsequent scheme cannot be looked into.
Compassionate appointments are not inherent rights, necessitating prompt application to address immediate family financial distress after the death of an employee.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the scheme prevalent at the time of the death of the employee shall be the basis for considering the application for compassionate appointment....
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
