Compassionate Appointment Cannot Be Sought As A Matter Of Right And To A Particular Post: Karnataka High Court

A single-judge bench of the Karnataka High Court comprising of Justice S.G. Pandit while deciding a writ petition in the case of Smt. K. C. Nagalambike and Ors. v. The Managing Director KSRTC & Ors. has held that compassionate appointment cannot be sought as a matter of right and at the same time compassionate appointment cannot be sought against a particular post.

Background of Facts

The father of the Sri. S. Guruswamy (Petitioner) was working as senior driver and died while in service in 2011. On his death, the Petitioner applied seeking compassionate appointment to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) in 2012, having been qualified in the particular field. Initially, an endorsement was issued stating that there is no vacancy of Junior Engineer (civil) and the Petitioner's name would not be included in the waiting list for appointment on compassionate grounds. Thereafter, the KSRTC (Respondent) decided not to make compassionate appointment to the Supervisory posts Grade-III. A subsequent endorsement issued in 2018 called upon the Petitioner to submit his application for the post of Junior Assistant-cum-Data Entry Operator, if he is willing to get appointment under compassionate ground. The Petitioner was also offered compassionate appointment to Grade-III Security Guard post which the petitioner refused.

It was contended by the Petitioner inter alia, that consideration shall be given for appointment on compassionate grounds in terms of the scheme which was existing as on the date of death of his father. The Petitioner further contended that the scheme which existed as on the relevant date provided for appointment to the Supervisory post and also to Junior Engineer Post. Since Petitioner No. 2 was a qualified Civil Engineering graduate, was qualified and entitled for the post of Junior Engineer. As such, the Petitioner contended that the non-consideration of his case is opposed to the scheme and the action of the Respondent is discriminatory.

On the other hand, the Respondent contended, inter alia, that a person cannot seek compassionate appointment as a matter of right and that a person cannot seek compassionate appointment to a particular post. The Respondent further contended that that compassionate appointment is governed by rules or schemes existing in the KSRTC and the scheme that existed as on the date of death of the Petitioner's father provided for compassionate appointment to Group-III Supervisory posts, but subsequently under a new scheme, which came into force in 2018, appointment on compassionate ground to Supervisory posts are prohibited and only appointments to Class-III posts could be made.

Findings of the Court

The court observed that the purpose and object of providing compassionate appointment is to see that the family of the deceased servant get over immediate financial distress due to sudden death of the breadwinner. In the present case, the Petitioner was offered the post of Junior Assistant-cum-Data Entry Operator since the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) was not vacant. Further, the Petitioner was offered the post of Grade-III Security Guard which he refused. If there had been necessity of employment due to death of the breadwinner, the Petitioner ought to have accepted the Respondent's offer.

Therefore, this court observed that:

“When compassionate appointment cannot be sought as a matter of right, at the same time has not right to seek compassionate appointment to a particular post. When the petitioners are able to survive without compassionate appointment for more than a decade, it means they may not require appointment much less for compassionate appointment."

With the aforementioned observations, the court rejected the petition.

Case: Smt. K. C. Nagalambike and Ors. v. The Managing Director KSRTC & Ors

Case No. W.P. No. 29984/2019

Counsels for the Applicant: Sri. S. B. Mukkannappa

Counsel for the Respondent: Sri. H. R. Renuka

Click Here To Read/Download Order