Ram Karan vs. Union Of India And Anr. - (High Court of Delhi) (19 Oct 2022)

Compassionate appointment being a concession and not a right cannot be used as a mode of recruitment in public sector organisations

MANU/DE/4075/2022

Service

The Petitioner, who is the son of late Shri Mata Pher, who was working as a gardener with the Respondent no.2 and, while in service, expired on 23rd March, 2010, has approached this Court seeking a direction to the said Respondent to grant him compassionate appointment in lieu of his deceased father.

The Petitioner's father expired at the age of 54 years, that is more than twelve and a half years ago. Undoubtedly, the Petitioner and his family must have faced financial hardships at that time on account of the sudden demise of the sole bread-earner of the family. It is, however, an admitted position that, at that stage, on account of the directions from the Respondent no.1 not to fill the 13 vacant unskilled Group D posts, the Respondent no.2 was precluded from filling up these posts, and had therefore, decided to get the work outsourced as per the directions of respondent no.1. Nothing has been brought on record to show that this decision of the respondent no.2 was not bona fide.

The Respondent no.2, in order to help the Petitioner and his family to tide over the financial difficulties on account of the sudden death of Mata Pher, engaged the Petitioner as a daily wager on compassionate grounds for more than a year. This Court, therefore, sees no reason to either interfere with this bona fide decision taken by the Respondent no.2 not to fill up these posts, or to direct the respondents to appoint the Petitioner on compassionate grounds, when there is no available post against which he can be appointed.

Even otherwise, it is a settled legal position that compassionate appointment is only meant to help the family of an employee to tide over his sudden demise, and cannot be used as a mode of recruitment and that too in public sector organisations like the Respondent no.2.

It is, thus, evident that compassionate appointment is an exception to the general rule of appointment in public services, aimed at ensuring that the family of a deceased employee is not left in penury. In the present case, the Petitioner lost his father in the year 2010, and was on compassionate grounds engaged by Respondent no.2, for over a year, albeit as a daily wager, and that too, when it had taken a decision, not to fill up vacant Group D posts on regular basis, as per the directions of Respondent no.1. Compassionate appointment being a concession, and not a right, issuance of any direction for granting compassionate appointment to the Petitioner, after more than twelve years of his father's death, would be against the very purpose of granting compassionate appointment. Petition dismissed.

Tags : POST APPOINTMENT ELIGIBILITY