P&H HC: Eyewitness Account Not Credible if Eyewitness Directly Identifies Accused in Court  ||  Delhi HC: Conditions u/s 45 PMLA Have to Give Way to Article 21 When Accused Incarcerated for Long  ||  Delhi High Court: Delhi Police to Add Grounds of Arrest in Arrest Memo  ||  Kerala High Court: Giving Seniority on the Basis of Rules is a Policy Decision  ||  Del. HC: Where Arbitrator has Taken Plausible View, Court Cannot Interfere u/s 34 of A&C Act  ||  Ker. HC: No Question of Estoppel Against Party Where Error is Committed by Court Itself  ||  Supreme Court: Revenue Entries are Admissible as Evidence of Possession  ||  SC: Mere Breakup of Relationship Between Consenting Couple Can’t Result in Criminal Proceedings  ||  SC: Bar u/s 195 CrPC Not Attracted Where Proceedings Initiated Pursuant to Judicial Order  ||  NTF Gives Comprehensive Suggestions on Enhancing Better Working Conditions of Medical Professions    

Kanuram Naskar Vs. The State of West Bengal and Ors. - (High Court of Calcutta) (25 Jul 2019)

Appointment on compassionate ground cannot be granted, if criterion for showing compassion is missing

MANU/WB/1797/2019

Service

The prayer of the Petitioner for being appointed on compassionate ground has been rejected by a communication. The same is impugned in the instant writ petition. The grounds for rejection of the petitioner's prayer have been specifically mentioned in the order of rejection. It was mentioned that (i) due to the increasing trend of huge revenue loss year over year because of decreasing consumption of coal gas by the consumers; (ii) increasing trend of expenditure for running the establishment; and (iii) gradual decrease of area of operation because of various reasons and all such factors contributing to non-requirement of additional manpower in Group-C and D categories. The Respondent Corporation has taken a decision that there was no scope to consider the prayer of the petitioner.

The order rejecting the prayer for compassionate appointment appears to be a perfectly reasoned one. The Corporation has assessed the requirement of man power, running expenditure etc. and arrived at a specific finding that there was no requirement of additional staff. In the absence of any cogent ground made out in the writ petition to assail the said findings of facts the reasons for rejecting the prayer of the petitioner cannot be faulted.

That apart, the order was passed on 16th July, 2015 and the Petitioner has challenged the same in the year 2019. No reason whatsoever has been mentioned in the writ petition for filing the writ petition at such a belated stage.

Prayer for appointment on compassionate ground is considered on urgent basis as the same is meant to tide over the sudden crisis faced by the family of an employee on the untimely death of the bread earner. In the instant case, the employee concerned expired in the year 2007. In the year 2019, there is hardly any scope or reason to show compassion. The immediate crisis which was faced by the petitioner in the year 2007 no longer subsists in the year 2019.

It is settled law that, appointment on compassionate ground is not a matter of right and the same is not a mode a regular employment. It is a concession and compassion that is shown to the family of the employee who died in harness. The criterion for showing compassion is palpably missing in the instant case. No relief can be granted to the Petitioner in the instant case.

Tags : COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT   REJECTION   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved