Remarriage Of Widow No Bar To Claim Compassionate Appointment Under Kerala Education Rules: High Court

Justice N Nagaresh held that compassionate appointment under Rule 51B is a vested statutory right and cannot be denied based on executive instructions applicable to government servants.

The petitioner's husband, a High School Assistant at an aided school in Kasargod, died in service in 2017. The widow applied for appointment under Rule 51B soon after his death. However, by the time a suitable vacancy arose in 2024, she had remarried. The school manager rejected her claim citing a 2023 Government Order (GO(P) No.12/2023/P&ARD) which disqualifies remarried widows/widowers from compassionate appointments. The respondent has also stated that the petitioner has not submitted an application in the prescribed form.

The Court examined whether remarriage of a dependent widow would disqualify her from appointment under Rule 51B of Chapter XIVA KER.

The Court drew a distinction between appointments governed by executive schemes applicable to government employees and those arising from statutory provisions under the KER.

“While in the case of government servants, the claim for compassionate appointment is based on executive instructions issued and amended by the Government from time to time, as far as Teachers in the Aided Schools in Kerala are concerned, compassionate appointment is a valuable statutory right.” the bench observed.

The Court further noted that even though the government orders relating to employment assistance to the dependents of government servants dying apply mutatis mutandis, it cannot be applied in a manner to defeat the right conferred under Rule 51B of Chapter XIVA KER.

“It is true that the Government Orders relating to employment assistance to the dependents of government servants dying in harness shall mutatis mutandis, apply in the matter of such appointments. But, going by the language of the Rule, such Government Orders cannot be applied in a manner to defeat the very conferment of right under Rule 51B Chapter XIVA KER.” the bench observed.

The Court held that the right conferred by Rule 51 B of Chapter XIVA KER is a vested right. It thus allowed the petition and directed the respondents to appoint the petitioner in the existing or next arising vacancy in the School.

Case Title: Mini R K v State of Kerala

Case No: WP(C) 3451/ 2025

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 736

Counsel for Petitioner: C P Peethamabaran, Neeraja Venugopal, arjun J Das, Divya Varghese

Counsel for Respondent: Murali Pallath, Anima M