In CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4103 OF 2022-SC-Applications for compassionate appointment must be decided as per prevalent policy at earliest but not beyond period of 6 months from date of submission of such applications, holds Top Court Justices M.R. Shah & B.V. Nagarathna [20-05-2022]

Read Judgment: Malaya Nanda Sethy v. State of Orissa and others 

Tulip Kanth

New Delhi, May 24, 2022: Holding that the appellant shall not be denied appointment on compassionate ground under the Orissa Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990, the Supreme Court has observed that applications for compassionate appointment have to be considered well in time and not in a tardy way.

Considering the fact that in several cases, applications for appointment on compassionate grounds are not attended in time and are kept pending for years together, the Division Bench of Justice M.R.Shah and Justice B.V.Nagarathna asserted, “… the authorities must consider and decide such applications for appointment on compassionate grounds as per the policy prevalent, at the earliest, but not beyond a period of six months from the date of submission of such completed applications.”

In this matter, the father of the appellant herein – original writ petitioner was working as an Assistant Sub-Inspector in the Excise Department. He passed away while in service. On the death of his father, the appellant applied for his appointment as a Junior Clerk on compassionate ground under the 1990 Rules in July, 2010.  It was the specific case of the appellant that his mother was unable to take a government job due to her medical condition and therefore he, being a son, applied for such appointment. When his application was kept pending he applied to the High Court by a Writ Petition which was dismissed. Hence,this appeal was filed.

The Bench was of the opinion that that there was no fault and/or delay and/or negligence on the part of the appellant at all. He was fulfilling all the conditions for appointment on compassionate grounds under the 1990 Rules.It was also held that there was an absolute callousness on the part of the department/authorities. 

Not only this but the Bench also asserted that the appellant had been deprived of seeking compassionate appointment, which he was otherwise entitled to under the 1990 Rules and was a victim of the delay and/or inaction on the part of the department/authorities. The Apex Court thus, directed the respondents to consider the case of the appellant for appointment on compassionate grounds as per his original application and if he is otherwise found eligible to appoint him on the post of Junior Clerk.