Appointment on compassionate ground is a concession, not a right and the object of granting such employment is to enable the affected family to tide over a sudden crisis, the Supreme Court has said.
The apex court last week set aside the judgement of a division bench of the Kerala High Court, which confirmed the verdict of a single judge directing the Fertilisers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd and others to consider the case of a woman for appointment on compassionate ground.
The wife of the deceased employee was working with the state government, she was ineligible for appointment on compassionate grounds.
Anusree made a representation seeking her appointment on compassionate grounds 14 years after her father’s death.
The Application Procedure
The application was rejected on February 12, 2018. The reason for the rejection of the application was that her name was not on the list of dependents submitted by the deceased employee.
As per the policy, employment could be provided to the widow or son, or unmarried daughter of the deceased employee. She challenged the dismissal of her application before the Kerala high court.
“Applying the law laid down by this court…to the facts of the case on hand… and the object and purpose for which the appointment on compassionate ground is provided, the respondent shall not be entitled to the appointment on compassionate ground on the death of her father who died in 1995,” a Bench led by Justice MR Shah said.
“After a period of 24 years from the death of the deceased employee, the respondent shall not be entitled to the appointment on compassionate ground. If such an appointment is made now and/or after a period of 14/24 years, the same shall be against the object and purpose for which the appointment on compassionate ground is provided,” it said last week.
“Both the single judge as well as the division bench of the high court have committed a serious error in directing the appellants to reconsider the case of the respondent for appointment on compassionate grounds. The impugned judgment and order passed by the high court are unsustainable,” the bench said.
The bench noted that appointment on compassionate grounds provides an exception to the equal opportunity norm in matters of public employment.