Allahabad High Court Orders Inquiry Against Officers Responsible For Flawed Compassionate Appointment

The Allahabad High Court recently denied relief to a petitioner dismissed from service on grounds that he obtained compassionate appointment without disclosing full facts, thereby vitiating the appointment with incurable defects. The Court also directed inquiry into the role of officials who were responsible for petitioner's appointment in the first instance.Holding petitioner's appointment after 5 years of the death of his father as void ab-initio, Justice Ajay Bhanot held,“The petitioner not only fails to satisfy the mandatory criteria for appointment on compassionate grounds, but in the facts of this case his appointment attracts an immediate and incurable disqualification. The infirmity in the appointment of the petitioner goes to the root of the matter, and strikes at the very legitimacy of the concept of compassionate appointments. The instant case actually shows how compassionate appointments are treated as a vested right. The manner of the petitioner's appointment also reflects a growing of entitlement which employees is impervious to any transparency and shuns all accountability.”Noting that the petitioner's appointment was a fraud which could have been made in connivance with the authorities, the Court observed,“The law has looked askance against creation of such contrivances to make back door entries in public employment for the benefit of serving employees and creating a monopoly in their favour by treating government jobs as a largesse.”Case BackgroundAfter the death of petitioner's father in 1984, he was appointed as a DSL Cleaner in Indian Railways on compassionate grounds. Thereafter, in 1989 he was removed from service by the Indian Railways. Subsequently, petitioner sought appointment as Assistant Teacher on 04.10.1990 under the Dying in Harness Rules. In 2020, petitioner was charge sheeted on grounds that he had hid his previous appointment and removal from service while seeking appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher, his limitation for seeking compassionate appointment had expired before 04.10.1990 and on account of certain financial irregularities and disobedience of the orders of superior authority.In his replies, petitioner never refuted the charges but demanded the documents relied on which were duly provided to him. Thereafter, a report was prepared by the Block Education Officer and subsequent show cause notice was issued to him along with all the documents. Petitioner in his reply only stated that he had not been provided any documents. Relying on the documents available and petitioner's reply, where he did not refute the charges, the Disciplinary Authority dismissed the petitioner from service. Appellate Authority upheld the dismissal order. Thereafter, petitioner approached the High Court. High Court VerdictThe Court observed, “Appointments on compassionate grounds give a sheltered entry to the dependents of a deceased employee into government service without the rigors of an open selection procedure. The competitive merit of candidates is of no relevance since the appointments are made without adopting the public selection procedure. Norms of recruitment are completely relaxed for appointment on compassionate grounds. However the law requires the applicants to possess minimum qualifications for the posts.”It reiterated that compassionate appointment is not a vested right but a right derived from a particular statute and the particulars of appointment provided in the statute must be strictly followed. The Court held that appointment due to inheritance must not become a source of recruitment. Regarding the delay in filing of application for compassionate appointment, the Court observed that through various judgments, the Courts have held that where there is long delay in filing applications or pursuing the case, the financial crisis faced by the family of the deceased employee had ceased to exist. “The legislative intent and judicial rationale for appointment on compassionate grounds is subserved only when an application for appointment on compassionate grounds is made in quick time and in near proximity to the death of the employee. No delay can be brooked in the applications for grant of appointment on compassionate grounds.”The Court held that the fact that the petitioner was employed with the Railways for 5 years after the death of his father, the family was not in dire financial need. It held that the financial crisis after removal of petitioner from service in Railways was his own making and not due to the death of his father. Moreover, it was noted that the same occurred 5 years after the death of the father. “Immediate financial destitution of the dependent caused by the death of an employee which is the mandatory prerequisite for appointment on compassionate ground does not exist in this case. The violation of the sole and imperative precondition for compassionate appointment is a non curable illegality which goes to the root, and renders the petitioner's...

Allahabad High Court Orders Inquiry Against Officers Responsible For Flawed Compassionate Appointment

Upasna Agrawal

Tags