HC stays order on compassionate appointment to man

HC stays order on compassionate appointment to man

Kaushik Kannan

Feb 23, 2025, 0:26 IST

HC stays order on compassionate appointment to man

Madurai: Compassionate appointment cannot be considered a mode of recruitment, it is only to tide over the immediate financial distress of the family of the deceased employee, which occurred due to the sudden demise of the sole breadwinner, Madras high court has observed. The court said this while setting aside an order of a single bench which directed the authorities to grant compassionate appointment to the son of a deceased govt employee from Karur district.

The court was hearing an appeal preferred by the Karur district collector and block development officer of Krishnarayapuram, challenging the order of the single bench.

P Jeyaraman was employed as a panchayat assistant in Pappakkapatti village. He died during service in 2015, leaving behind his mother, wife, son J Mahendiran, and his sister as his legal heirs. At the time of his death, Mahendiran was 15 years old, and his sister was 12 years old. The family was in a precarious financial situation, as Jeyaraman was the sole breadwinner.

Mahendiran submitted an application seeking compassionate employment. The application was rejected since the petitioner was a minor at the time of application. After attaining majority, Mahendiran submitted an application in 2021. However, it was also rejected on the basis that it was made three years after his father's death. Hence, Mahendiran filed a petition before the court seeking relief.

The single bench stated that Mahendiran's application was rejected on the sole ground that he was a minor on the date of his father's death. However, the order did not address the indigenous circumstances of the family of the deceased employee. Hence, the single bench directed the authorities to grant compassionate appointment to Mahendiran. Challenging the order, the present appeal was preferred by the authorities.

A division bench of justice J. Nisha Banu and justice S Srimathy observed that the full bench of the Madras high court held that the legal heir is entitled to compassionate appointment if the application is submitted within three years from the date of the employee's death. If the legal heir is a minor at the time of submitting the application, then the heir is not entitled to compassionate appointment. It was further held that any application submitted after attaining majority, but by the time the three-year period had lapsed, the legal heir is not entitled to compassionate appointment.

The judges observed that in the case at hand, the applicant's father died in 2015. The three-year period was over in Oct 2018, and the applicant attained majority in 2019. Therefore, the petitioner was not entitled to compassionate appointment. The mother of the petitioner was entitled to compassionate appointment, but she did not choose to apply for the same.

"The compassionate appointment post cannot be kept endlessly vacant for the family of the deceased employee," the judges observed and set aside the order.