Appointment on compassionate ground cannot be claimed after a number of years from the death of the deceased employee – Supreme Court

Law Centrum

10 Oct 2022

The bench consisting of Justices M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari has directed against the judgment passed by High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition No. 11614 of 2018 and the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in a case involving appointment on compassionate ground of a daughter of the deceased government servant. The Supreme Court has stated that the Tribunal as well as the High Court have committed serious error in directing the appellants to appoint the respondent on compassionate ground.

Brief Facts

On the death of the deceased employee – father of the respondent, who died in harness, the mother of the respondent was given appointment on compassionate ground. The mother of the respondent died on 28.03.2006. Thereafter the elder daughter of the deceased employee made an application for appointment on compassionate ground. The said application was rejected vide communication dated 18.08.2011 on the ground that she cannot be given the appointment on compassionate ground as she is a married daughter.

After a period of seven years from the date of death of her mother, again, the respondent Late Smt. Lata Maruti Vidhate, the younger married daughter applied for appointment on compassionate ground vide representation dated 12.03.2013. The application of the respondent for appointment on compassionate ground came to be rejected vide order dated 23.04.2013.

The respondent filed O.A. No. 860 of 2015 before the Tribunal approximately after a period of two years from the rejection of her application for appointment on compassionate ground. The Tribunal vide its judgment and order dated 24.03.2017 allowed the said O.A. and directed to consider the respondent’s case for appointment on compassionate ground. The order passed by the Tribunal has been confirmed by the High Court by the impugned judgment and order, which is the subject matter of present appeal before this Court.

Question posed for the consideration of Supreme Court

Whether the respondent (the younger married daughter) shall be entitled to the appointment on compassionate ground?

Judgment

In the said decision, after referring to a catena of judgments of the Supreme Court on the appointment on compassionate ground, the court observed that appointment on compassionate ground offered to a dependent of a deceased employee is an exception to equal opportunity rule mandated under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The compassionate ground is a concession which is given out of pure humanitarian consideration to enable the family of the deceased to get over a sudden financial crisis. Thus, the court held that to appoint the respondent on compassionate ground shall be contrary to the object and purpose of appointment on compassionate ground. The respondent cannot be said to be dependent on the deceased employee, i.e., her mother. Even otherwise, she shall not be entitled to appointment on compassionate ground after a number of years from the death of the deceased employee.

Supreme Court held that, “the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal confirmed by the High Court directing the appellants to consider the case of the respondent for appointment on compassionate ground after a number of years is unsustainable”.

The court has referred to and considered the Director of Treasuries in Karnataka and Anr. Vs. V. Somyashree, 2021 SCC Online SC 704, N.C. Santhosh Vs. State of Karnataka, (2020) 7 SCC 617, State of Himachal Pradesh and Anr. Vs. Shashi Kumar reported in (2019) 3 SCC 653, Govind Prakash Verma Vs. LIC, reported in (2005) 10 SCC 289, and n Mumtaz Yunus Mulani v. State of Maharashtra [(2008) 11 SCC 384] in this regard.

Case Title: The State of Maharashtra and Anr. Versus Ms. Madhuri Maruti Vidhate