Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harwinder Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 22 October, 2024
Author: Lisa Gill
Bench: Lisa Gill
SUNIL LPA No.2041 of 2024 (O&M) -1- oy IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH LPA No.2041 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 22.10.2024 HARWINDER SINGH beeees Appellants(s) Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS .... Respondent(s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR Present: Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advocate for appellant. sesh ae LISA GILE, J.
CM-4847-LPA-2024 There is a delay of 44 days in filing of this appeal.
For reasons mentioned in the application and arguments addressed, delay of 44 days in filing of the appeal is condoned.
Application is disposed of accordingly.
LPA No.2041 of 2024
1. Prayer in this appeal is for setting aside order dated 02.05.2024, passed by learned Single Bench whereby CWP-17351-2021, filed by present appellant/writ petitioner has been dismissed.
2024.11.05 10:24 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document SUNIL LPA No.2041 of 2024 (O&M) -2-
2. Appellant/writ petitioner filed CWP-17351-2021 for setting aside orders dated 06.01.2020 and 17.07.2018 whereby writ petitioner's claim for appointment to the post of Senior Assistant instead of Clerk on compassionate basis had been rejected. Prayer of writ petitioner as regard his service being covered under the Old Pension Scheme was granted in the interregnum. Writ petition was accordingly pressed in respect to appointment to a post higher than the one he was holding on compassionate grounds. Case set up by writ petitioner was that his father was serving as Joint Director in the office of Examiner, Local Fund Accounts, Punjab. When he went missing on 05.08.2000, DDR dated 08.08.2000 was recorded in this regard. Untraced report was filed by the authorities on 26.12.2001 while civil death of writ petitioner's father was declared by learned Civil Court on 18.02.2013. Writ petitioner's mother, submitted representation dated 15.02.2002 seeking pensionary/retiral benefits as well as appointment on compassionate basis for present petitioner. Vide communication dated 22.05.2002, it was conveyed that request for compassionate appointment would be considered only after completion of 07 years from the date writ petitioner's father went missing. However, on subsequent repeated representations of writ petitioner's mother, case was reconsidered and appellant was appointed to the post of Clerk vide appointment letter dated 20.05.2005. Appellant/writ petitioner statedly joined the post of Clerk under protest due to his peculiar conditions, while claiming appointment to a higher post of Senior Assistant. When his case was rejected, above said writ petition was filed.
2024.11.05 10:24 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document SUNIL LPA No.2041 of 2024 (O&M) -3-
3. Learned Single Bench while considering the facts and circumstances dismissed the writ petition while noting that appointment on compassionate grounds is not an alternate means of employment. Furthermore, writ petitioner had accepted appointment to the post of Clerk in the year 2005 without demur and it is only after more than a decade that he raked up the issue and that too in the absence of any Rule or Instruction to buttress his claim. Aggrieved of order dated 02.05.2024 in CWP-17351-2021, present appeal has been filed.
4. Learned counsel for appellant vehemently argues that similarly situated persons had been afforded appointment to the post of Senior Assistant whereas the same concession was denied to present appellant. It is thus prayed that this appeal be allowed, impugned order dated 02.05.2024 be set aside and writ petition be allowed as prayed for.
5. We have heard learned counsel for appellant and have gone through the file with his able assistance.
6. It is pertinent to note at this stage that appointment on compassionate basis is not a vested right and neither is it a mode of alternate recruitment. The provision is meant to help the affected family tide over a period of crisis, which may have arisen due to unfortunate demise of the sole bread earner. It cannot be claimed or offered after a lapse of time or after the crisis is over. Gainful reference in this respect can also be made to judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of State of Jammu and Kashmir Vs. Sajid Ahmed Mir, AIR 2006 (SQ)2743, wherein it was held that grant of 2024.11.05 10:24 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document SUNIL LPA No.2041 of 2024 (O&M) -4- appointment on compassionate basis after lapse of considerable period of time after the death of a Government employee, would not be in furtherance of the object of a scheme for compassionate appointment. Gainful reference in this respect can also be made to judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in The State of West Bengal Vs. Debabrata Tiwari and others 2023 AIR (SC) 1467. Moreover, it is to be noted that provision for appointment on compassionate basis is a clear departure from general provisions providing for appointment to a post. Such appointment is clearly not a source of recruitment. The same is a measure adopted by an employer to help the family of the deceased employee to tide over an immediate crisis which may arise on death of such employee to overcome the state of penury which may visit them on such death.
7. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Umesh Kumar Nagpal Vs. State of Haryana and others, 1994(3) SCT 174 held that whole object of granting compassionate employment is to enable the family of deceased employee to tide over sudden crisis and to save the family from financial destitution. This favourable treatment given to dependent of the deceased employee was accepted as it bore a rational nexus to the object sought to be achieved viz. relief against destitution. It is further observed that compassionate appointment can't be claimed when the crisis is over and neither can it be offered on an ad hoc basis. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh and others Vs. Amit Sriwas, 2020(10) SCC 496 reiterated that there is no inherent right to appointment on compassionate basis. It is a right based on certain criteria and is to provide support to a needy family.
2024.11.05 10:24 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document SUNIL LPA No.2041 of 2024 (O&M) 5-
8. Appointment of appellant to the post of Clerk on compassionate basis in the year 2005 is a matter of record. Admittedly, appellant accepted said appointment but has raised his claim for appointment to a higher post after about 13 years. Learned counsel for appellant is unable to point out any ground whatsoever, which entitles appellant to such appointment. The argument that concession being given to similarly situated persons would entitle him to the same concession, is clearly devoid of any merits. Two wrongs can never make a right. Therefore, unless and until appellant can point out a vested right in his favour to the claim as projected, no relief can be granted.
9. Learned counsel for appellant is unable to point out any infirmity, irregularity or perversity in the impugned order dated 02.05.2024, passed by learned Single Bench, which is accordingly upheld.
10. No other argument has been addressed.
11. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above, this appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to cost.
12. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of accordingly.
(LISA GILL) JUDGE (SUKHVINDER KAUR) 22.10.2024 JUDGE Sunil Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No 2024.11.05 10:24 | attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document