Order On Board

30.04.2024

1. This Writ Petition has been iled for grant of compassionate appointment as father of the petitioner namely Chaitu Ram Koshle died in harness on 27.03.2008.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the father of the petitioner, while working as Waterman in Pre-metric Schedule Caste Boys Hostel Simga, District Raipur (now Balodabazar), expired on 27.03.2008 (Annexure P/1). Thereafter the petitioner, who was unmarried at the relevant time, preferred an application for grant of compassionate appointment on 17.06.2009, however, the said application was dismissed by the order dated 20.07.2009 (Annexure P/2) as the application was iled beyond the limitation period of 6 months from the date of death of the deceased employee. Subsequently, when it came to the notice of the petitioner that an order has been passed by this Court to the efect that the married daughter of the deceased employee has also a right to ile an application for grant of compassionate appointment, she iled an application (Annexure P/3) before Jandarshan on 25.04.2016. However, when the claim of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment was not decided by the respondent authorities, this petition has been iled.

3. In the return iled by the State, it has been stated that compassionate appointment is granted in accordance with the Policy of the State and the petitioner has not challenged the Scheme/Circular, whereby, her earlier application was rejected on 20.07.2009, as time barred. Further, at the time of iling of the petition, the age of the petitioner was 46 years and thus, she has already crossed the maximum age criteria for appointment in the Government Service i.e. 38 years with all relaxations. Hence, this petition is misconceived and liable to be dismissed.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record annexed with the petition carefully.

5. It is well settled that a claim for compassionate appointment may not be entertained after lapse of a considerable period of time since the death of the Government employee. Even otherwise, there is a speciic provision in the Scheme formulated by the State Government, wherein, certain limitation has been ixed.

6. In the case at hand, the father of the petitioner died on

27.03.2008. The earlier application of the petitioner was dismissed on 20.07.2009 vide Annexure P/2, as the same was iled belatedly. Thereafter, the present petition has been iled in the year 2018.

7. Recently in the matter of State of West Bengal vs. Debabrata Tiwari and Others1, it has been categorically observed that in a case where, for reasons of prolonged delay, either on the part of the applicant in claiming compassionate appointment or the authorities in deciding such claim, the sense of immediacy is diluted and lost. Further, the inancial circumstances of the family of the deceased, may have changed, for the better, since the time of the death of the government employee. In such circumstances, Courts or other relevant authorities are to be guided by the fact that for such prolonged period of delay, the family of the deceased was able to sustain themselves, most probably by availing gainful employment from some other source. Granting compassionate appointment in such a case would amount to treating a claim for compassionate appointment as though it were a matter of inheritance based on a line of succession which is contrary to the Constitution. Since

2023 SCC OnLine SC 219

compassionate appointment is not a vested right and the same is relative to the inancial condition and hardship faced by the dependents of the deceased government employee as a consequence of his death, a claim for compassionate appointment may not be entertained after lapse of a considerable period of time since the death of the government employee. The principles for grant of compassionate appointment have been summarized at paras-32 to 35, which read thus:-

“32. On consideration of the aforesaid decisions of this Court, the follow