1. Application for compassionate appointment following a parent's medical retirement — rejection based on financial eligibility criteria and suppression of material facts regarding employment. (Para 3 , 4 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 )
Back
Next 
2022 Supreme(SC) 1278
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
INDIRA BANERJEE, V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, JJ.
Central Bank of India – Appellant
Versus
Nitin – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 5111 of 2022, SLP (C) No. 19757 of 2021
Decided On : 03-08-2022
Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Debal Kumar Banerji, Divyanshu Sahay, Shradha Narayan, Akshay Samay, Mithu Jain.
For the Respondents: Pragyan Pradeep Sharma, Neeraj Kumar Gupta, Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Kartikay Dutia, Pallavi Kumari, Arti Prasad, Abhishek Kumar.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Debal Kumar Banerji, Divyanshu Sahay, Shradha Narayan, Akshay Samay, Mithu Jain.
For the Respondents: Pragyan Pradeep Sharma, Neeraj Kumar Gupta, Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Kartikay Dutia, Pallavi Kumari, Arti Prasad, Abhishek Kumar.
Compassionate appointment must strictly adhere to the prevalent rules, including financial criteria, and cannot be granted as a matter of course.
Headnote:
Compassionate Appointment Scheme - Financial Criteria - Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs. State of Haryana, (1994) 4 SCC 138, Canara Bank and Another vs. M. Mahesh Kumar, (2015) 7 SCC 412, Balbir Kuar and Another vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Others, (2000) 6 SCC 493, Yogesh Nagraoji Ugale vs. State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Others, (2020) 19 SCC 426
Fact of the Case:
The respondent's father applied for voluntary premature retirement due to medical incapacitation. The respondent applied for compassionate appointment after his father's retirement, suppressing his employment with ICICI Bank. The committee rejected the proposal for compassionate appointment based on the family's income exceeding the prescribed limit.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court erred in ignoring the financial criteria for compassionate appointment and the respondent's suppression of material facts. The appeal is allowed, and the impugned judgment is set aside.
Issues: Suppression of material facts in the application for compassionate appointment, rejection based on family income exceeding the prescribed limit, and the High Court's oversight of the financial criteria for compassionate appointment.
Ratio Decidendi: Compassionate appointment must strictly adhere to the prevalent rules, including financial criteria, and cannot be granted as a matter of course. The application for compassionate appointment must be preferred without undue delay and considered within a reasonable period of time.
Final Decision: The appeal is allowed, and the impugned judgment and order are set aside. There shall be no order as to costs.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether financial indigence is a mandatory prerequisite for compassionate appointment and if the right to such appointment can be defeated by financial criteria. (Para 15 )
3. Compassionate appointment is an exception to equality intended to relieve immediate financial crisis; financial criteria in schemes are valid and must be strictly applied. (Para 16 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 )
4. Compassionate appointment must be granted strictly according to the governing scheme; financial eligibility criteria are lawful and necessary to prevent exclusion of more destitute candidates. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 )
5. Appeal allowed and the impugned judgment and order set aside. (Para 25 )
6. What is the primary objective and nature of compassionate appointment?
Compassionate appointment is an exception to the rule of equality designed to enable the dependent family of a deceased or medically incapacitated employee to tide over an immediate financial crisis. (Para 16 , 20 )
7. Can a public employer mandate financial eligibility criteria for compassionate appointment?
Yes, rules providing financial criteria are valid and lawful. They must be construed strictly to ensure the quota is not filled by those who are not in acute financial distress. (Para 21 )
8. Does a dependent have an automatic right to compassionate appointment upon application?
No, the claim is traceable only to the scheme framed by the employer. There is no right to employment outside such a scheme, and appointment is not automatic. (Para 22 )
9. Does the suppression of material facts in an application for compassionate appointment affect eligibility?
Yes, the suppression of material facts, such as current employment, is a valid ground for the rejection of a claim for compassionate appointment. (Para 23 )
JUDGMENT :
INDIRA BANERJEE, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is against the judgment and order dated 04.08.2021 passed by the Aurangabad Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, (Division Bench), allowing the writ petition being Writ Petition No. 12352 of 2018 filed by the respondent and directing the appellant to consider the case of the respondent for compassionate appointment as per his seniority in filing the application for compassionate appointment, “but from the date of the petitioner having quit his clerical job with the ICICI Bank Limited.”
3. The respondent-writ petitioner’s father, Mr. Y.P. Arawade, who was working as Special Assistant in the Kolgaon Branch of the Appellant-Bank in Ahmednagar District, Maharashtra applied for voluntary premature retirement from service on 16.04.2015 on the ground of medical incapacitation.
4. The prayer of the respondent writ petitioner’s father for premature retirement on the ground of medical incapacitation was allowed with effect from 26.06.2015.
5. The appellant-Bank has from time to time framed schemes for dependents of deceased employees/physically incapacitated employees in terms of the guidelines issued by the Government of India/Indian Banks Association pursuant to the observations of this Court in Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs. State of Haryana , (1994) 4 SCC 138.
6. A scheme called ‘Scheme for Payment of Ex-Gratia Lump Sum Amount in lieu of Appointment on Compassionate Grounds’ hereinafter referred to as “the Scheme” came into force with effect from 14.12.2005. The Scheme provided for payment of an ex-gratia lump sum amount to employees seeking premature retirement on the ground of medical incapacitation.
7. Employees of the appellant-Bank seeking premature retirement due to medical incapacitation, before attaining the age of 55 years, were to be entitled to the benefit of the Scheme, subject to the condition that the total monthly income of the family arrived at, as per the calculation prescribed, was less than 60% of the last drawn gross salary of the employee.
8. By a Circular being CIR/HR/2014-15/532/4 dated 11.08.2014, the Indian Banks’ Association circulated a revised scheme for compassionate appointment in Public Sector Banks pursuant to the approval of the Government of India conveyed vide D.O. Letter No. 18/2/2013-IR dated 07.08.2014.
9. The scheme as circulated by the Indian Banks’ Association was adopted by the appellant-Bank. By a circular dated 08.04.2018, the appellant-Bank notified “The Scheme For Appointment on Compassionate Grounds or Payment of Lumpsum Ex-Gratia Amount” hereinafter referred to as the “Compassionate Appointment Scheme.” The Compassionate Appointment Scheme came into effect from 06.08.2014.
10. As recorded above, by an order dated 25.06.2015, the appellant-Bank permitted said Y.P. Arwade, father of the respondent writ petitioner to voluntarily retire from service on the ground of medical incapacitation and he was relieved from duty w.e.f. 25.06.2015.
11. On 20.07.2015, the respondent writ petitioner applied for compassionate appointment in place of his father in terms of the Compassionate Appointment Scheme. It appears that at the material time when the respondent writ petitioner applied for compassionate appointment, he had been working as a Clerk in the ICICI Bank Ltd.
12. In his application for compassionate appointment, the respondent writ petitioner suppressed the fact that he was employed in the ICICI Bank. He misrepresented himself as not employed. The respondent writ petitioner resigned on 02.03.2016, i.e. almost eight months after he submitted his application for appointment of compassionate grounds.
13. On 25th January, 2018 the application of the respondent was considered by a Four Member Committee constituted under the Compassionate Appointment Scheme. The Committee found that the retired employee was earning monthly pension of Rs. 25,110/- and had received other retiral financial benefits totalling Rs. 27,05,766/-. After adjusting loan l
