'Death Certificate Can't Be Sought In Contemplation Of Death': Orissa HC Urges Relaxation On Limitation In Compassionate Appointment Cases

The Orissa High Court has asked the State Government to consider excluding the time period taken by legal heirs in obtaining a death certificate, a legal heir certificate, a distress certificate etc., from the limitation period for applying for a compassionate appointment in lieu of the death of a government employee in harness.While granting relief to a lady seeking rehabilitation assistance for the death of her father in the year 2010, the bench of Justice Dixit Krishna Shripad observed, “It hardly needs to be stated that these certificates cannot be applied for in contemplation of death of employee in harness. It is only after the death, the cause of action for applying these certificates would arise. It may not be irrelevant to mention that even the Limitation Act, 1963 has several provisions which provide for excluding the time taken for obtaining copies of judgments, orders & decrees while computing the period of limitation. Although, these provisions are not applicable to RA Claims, analogical wisdom can be drawn from them.”The father of the petitioner died in harness on 22.12.2010 while working as a Peon in KSUB College, Bhanjanagar. The petitioner filed an application on 10.09.2011 before the relevant opposite party seeking compassionate appointment. The Governing Body of the College forwarded the petitioner's application to the third opposite party on 19.04.2013, which was in turn forwarded to the Collector, Ganjam for issuance of distress certificate. Though the distress certificate was issued, the application for compassionate appointment was rejected on 03.08.2021 on the sole ground that it was time barred in terms of Rule 7(5) of OCS (RA) Rules, 2020. Being aggrieved, the petitioner knocked at the portals of the High Court. Upon hearing the parties, the Court acknowledged the cumbersome procedure through which such applications are made and processed. The relevant Rules require an applicant to produce documents such as Death Certificate, Legal Heir Certificate, Distress Certificate etc. along with the application for compassionate appointment. Justice Shripad observed that such certificates can only be applied after the demise of the bread-winner/deceased employee. Moreover, all these certificates are to be obtained at the hands of different authorities, who function on an ex officio basis under several statutes. He took note of procedures such as issuing notice to other side or public notice, hearing of contestants or rival claimants, which obviously consume a considerable time. “A person cannot be asked to perform the impossible, in the sense that he should obtain all these certificates within the prescribed limitation period. Unless these certificates are produced, the application for compassionate appointment will be incomplete and therefore suffers rejection. Law does not expect anyone to do the impossible, vide lex non cogit ad impossibilia,” he added.An analogy was drawn from the provisions of the Limitation Act, which contains several provisions prescribing for exclusion of time consumed in obtaining copies of judgments, orders and decrees while computing limitation periods. Even though the provisions of the Act are not applicable to the rehabilitation assistance scheme, the Court asked the State to consider excluding time taken for procuring different certificates, which can only be obtained after the demise of the employee.“More of [sic] than not, such Rules are rightly called Compassionate Appointment Provisions and therefore, while construing their provisions, compassion should be the substratum or undercurrent. Otherwise, the State will not bring Welfare Governance which the Constitution of India ordains.”The Court also noted that even though the petitioner filed the application well within the limitation period along with all the relevant documents, the delay occurred due to the filing of an objection by the widow of the deceased employee. Furthermore, the Court lamented that despite the year of death being 2010, during which the 1990 Rules were prevalent, the authorities invoked the 2020 Rules merely to reject the application on the ground of limitation.Resultantly, the Court allowed the writ petition by quashing the rejection order. The matter was remitted back to the State for de novo consideration of the application within a strict period of three months. The Court also warned that if the State fails to act within three months, the concerned officer shall be personally liable to pay Rs. 500/- per day to the petitioner for each day of delay.Case Title: Rasmita Nayak v. State of Odisha & Ors.Case No: W.P.(C) No. 32953 of 2024Date of Judgment: October 16, 2025Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. Lingaraj Mohanty, P. Pattanaik and T. Sahoo, AdvocatesCounsel for the Respondents: Mr. J.K. Khandayatray, Addl. Standing CounselCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ori) 134Click Here To Read/Download Order

'Death Certificate Can't Be Sought In Contemplation Of Death': Orissa HC Urges Relaxation On Limitation In Compassionate Appointment Cases

Jyoti Prakash Dutta

Tags