Compassionate appointment is governed strictly by the applicable scheme; if the scheme disqualifies candidates based on a family member's government employment, the court cannot introduce external factors like dependency or marital status to override that disqualification.

Judgment on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

1. Heard Mr. Hanuman Prasad Agrawal, learned counsel for the Appellant as well as Mr. Prasun Kumar Bhaduri, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State/Respondents.

2. The present intra Court appeal has been filed against the order dated 14.05.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No.4154/2026, whereby the writ petition filed by the Appellant/Writ Petitioner before the learned Single Judge has been dismissed.

3. The facts before the learned Single Judge were that the father of the Appellant, namely Late Janak Lal Bargah, was appointed as Assistant Grade-II vide order dated 09.07.1987 and was serving under the office of Respondent No.2 at Jagdalpur. During the course of his service, he met with a road accident on 30.12.2025 and succumbed to the injuries sustained therein while in service. After the demise of her father, the Appellant, being eligible, submitted an application dated 27.01.2026 seeking appointment on compassionate grounds under the applicable policy. However, Respondent No.2, by order dated 20.02.2026, rejected the claim solely on the ground that the Appellant's elder sister is a Government employee.

4. Aggrieved by the rejection order dated 20.02.2026, the Appellant preferred WPS No.4154 of 2026 before the learned Single Juege contending, inter alia, that her elder sister had been married on 09.05.2016 and had been residing in her matrimonial home since then and, therefore, could not be treated as a dependent member of the deceased employee's family for the purpose of denying compassionate appointment. It was further contended that the Appellant, being the eldest unmarried daughter residing with the family, was responsible for maintaining the surviving family members after the death of her father. The learned Single Judge, by judgment and order dated 14.05.2026, dismissed WPS No.4154 of 2026 holding that the issue was covered by the Division Bench judgments in WA No.91 of 2022 and WA No.334 of 2021, wherein it was held that compassionate appointment is governed strictly by the applicable scheme and that where a family member is already in Government service, no enquiry regarding dependency or financial support is required. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 14.05.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge, the present Writ Appeal has been preferred.

5. Learned counsel for the Appellant/Writ Petitioner submits that the learned Single Judge has erred in dismissing the writ petition by mechanically applying the bar contained in the compassionate appointment scheme without appreciating the peculiar facts of the present case. It is contended that the Appellant's elder sister had been married on 09.05.2016, much prior to the death of the deceased employee, and has been residing in her matrimonial home with her husband ever since. Therefore, she cannot be treated as a dependent member of the deceased employee's family so as to disentitle the Appellant from being considered for compassionate appointment.

6. Learned counsel further submits that after the death of the Appellant's father on 30.12.2025, the family was left without its sole breadwinner and the Appellant, being the eldest unmarried daughter residing with the family, is responsible for maintaining her widowed mother and younger siblings. It is submitted that the Appellant is duly qualified for appointment and that the object of compassionate appointment, namely to provide immediate financial relief to the bereaved family, stands frustrated if her claim is rejected solely because her married sister is employed in Government service.

7. It is further submitted that the learned Single Judge failed to consider the subsequent judgment of the Division Bench in WA No.429 of 2026 (Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ambikapur v. Mukund Hela & Others), decided on 12.05.2026 wherein it has been held that mere employment of one family memb