• Compassionate Appointment - Applicability of Rules - Whether the Government employee who seeks compassionate appointment would be governed by rules/policy in operation at the time of death of an employee or the rules/policy applicable on the date when his case would be considered by the appropriate authority - Krishana Kumari v. State of Haryana, (2012-3)161 P.L.R. 383 (F.B.) - Deemed to have been over-ruled by implication - MGA Gramin Bank v. Chakrawarti Singh, (2014)13 S.C.C. 583 - Matter requires to be re-considered by constituting a Larger Bench or by a Co-ordinate Bench of Krishna Kumari's case, J.) . (179) P.L.R.
  • Compassionate Appointment - Completely and Permanently incapacitated for further service in the Department - With effect from 14.05.2001 was declared unfit - Filed an affidavit exercising his option to get employment under the Haryana Government ex-gratia Scheme - Rule 19 of 2003 notification did not repeal policy dated 23.11.1992 - Had made an application for compassionate appointment on 12.02.2003 - Consequently the 23.11.1992 policy/instructions continued to be valid and subsisting not only on the date on which the petitioner's father suffered disability but also on the date on which the petitioner's application was taken up for consideration and disposed of by the impugned order dated 14.03.2005 - The instructions/policy dated 23.11.1992 were withdrawn only thereafter on 20.03.2006.(181) P.L.R.
  • Compassionate Appointment - Food Corporation of India - There is no time limit prescribed for making of claims for compassionate appointments and that even belated claims can be considered - Application moved on behalf of the petitioner seeking compassionate appointment was filed well within time and it was the respondents who had virtually slept over the matter for several years inspite of the fact that all documents including the income certificate showing the income of the family - Case was rejected on the ground that it was time barred - Petition allowed.  (179) P.L.R.
  • Compassionate Appointment - It is no bodies fundamental right to be provided a Government job without competition in a country where there are no jobs to be had for the asking and a large population is visited by hunger, want and deprivation of the bare necessities of life - This special provision is meant as a means of empowerment for those extreme and unique cases of disadvantaged weaker sections of society, who may under circumstances of an untimely death of a parent/spouse in government service be relegated to a life of depravity.(181) P.L.R.
  • Compassionate Appointment - Petitioner way back in the year 1999 had accepted the appointment granted to him as Junior Engineer on the basis of his qualification 8 years after the death of his father - Solely because he has improved his qualification subsequently as such there is no vested right to ask for appointment to the post of PCS (Executive Branch). (183) P.L.R.
  • Compassionate Appointment - Public posts are not standing crop to be reaped with the sickle of compassionate appointment - Such appointments are an exception to the rule of equality of opportunity - It appears to this Court inappropriate in a poverty stricken country like India to even seriously consider giving such huge concessions to wards of Government servants who may have contributed little to society except the good fortune of having secured a Government job once upon a time - Instructions on the subject are to be strictly construed leaving discretion to be exercised reasonably within boundaries of the scheme of compassionate appointments or the extension thereof on terms and conditions laid down by policy declarations by the government. (182) P.L.R.
  • Compassionate Appointment - Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission - Rightly considered as per the amended policy - By now about 17 years have passed since the death of the father of the petitioner - Alternatively, if he had tried and competed for a job in the open market, without waiting for the compassionate appointment to fructify, he may well have succeeded - And thereby hangs a tale which all applicants for compassionate appointment ought to take note of - Pursue your cases by all means, if you will, but simultaneously, do not give up on your effort to compete for a job on your own merit and capability. (179) P.L.R.
  • Compassionate Appointment - That Scheme/Policy which was invogue at the time of deceased employee who died in harness is applicable.  (182) P.L.R.
  • Compassionate employment - Respondent was not given appointment on compassionate ground as per the policy because, as per the policy, more deserving candidates were available for giving appointment on the compassionate ground - Though the case of the respondent was considered, she could not be appointed as there were claimants who were more needy than the respondent  Central Administrative Tribunal was not right in giving the direction to consider the case of the respondent again and again, especially when the case of the respondent had been duly considered and had been rejected, in view of the fact that more deserving claimants were available at the relevant time - Respondent has no right to be appointed on compassionate ground on the death of her husband if there is somebody more needy than the respondent. (2016)3 P.L.R.SC 197
  • Compassionate employment - Respondent was not given appointment on compassionate ground as per the policy because, as per the policy, more deserving candidates were available for giving appointment on the compassionate ground - Though the case of the respondent was considered, she could not be appointed as there were claimants who were more needy than the respondent  Central Administrative Tribunal was not right in giving the direction to consider the case of the respondent again and again, especially when the case of the respondent had been duly considered and had been rejected, in view of the fact that more deserving claimants were available at the relevant time - Respondent has no right to be appointed on compassionate ground on the death of her husband if there is somebody more needy than the respondent. (181) P.L.R. (S.C.)

Supreme Court e@journal
PUNJAB LAW REPORTER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Download

Android App

on the Google Play Store

SUPREME COURT e@Journal

 

  PUNJAB LAW REPORTER 

 Reporting Since 1900

articles

Privacy Policy | Cookie policy | Sitemap
(c) Punjab Law Reporter / punjablawreporter@gmail.com / 9463598502
Log out | Edit