Madhya Pradesh High Court
Piyush Kushwah vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:19316
1 WP-29661-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ASHISH SHROTI
ON THE 26th OF AUGUST, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 29661 of 2024
PIYUSH KUSHWAH
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Krishna Kant Shrivastava - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Jitesh Sharma- Govt. Advocate for the respondents/State.
ORDER
The petitioner is aggrieved by order, dated 13.07.2021, whereby his
appointment on compassionate ground has been cancelled by the respondent-
District Education Officer, Guna on the ground that he does not satisfy the
age criteria of 21 year for appointment on the post of Laboratory Teacher.
The impugned order also stipulates that as soon as the petitioner completes
21 years of age, he can be granted the compassionate appointment.
2. The facts necessary for decision of this case are that the petitioner's
father late Shri Parvat Singh was working as Teacher in the respondent-
department. He having died-in-harness, the petitioner applied for grant of
compassionate appointment. The application of the petitioner was accepted
and he was granted compassionate appointment on the post of Laboratory
Teacher on probation for a period of three years vide order, dated
08.02.2021, (Annexure P/2). In compliance of the said order, the petitioner
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:19316
2 WP-29661-2024
submitted his joining on 15.02.2021 and accordingly started working. The
impugned order thereafter came to be passed by respondent-District
Education Officer on 13.07.2021 whereby the petitioner's compassionate
appointment was canceled on the ground that the petitioner is ineligible for
appointment on the of Laboratory Teacher as he had not completed 21 years
of age on the date of appointment. Invoking Clause 4 of appointment order,
the petitioner's appointment was cancelled with the stipulation that in case,
the age is relaxed by the State Government in future or when the petitioner
completes 21 years of age, he can be granted compassionate appointment.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the cancellation of
appointment order of the petitioner is illegal inasmuch as he was appointed
on compassionate ground which is always dehors the rules. Not completing
21 years of age, cannot be a ground for cancellation of his appointment
order. He further submitted that as per the stipulation in the impugned order,
since the petitioner has now completed 21 years of age, he is entitled to be
appointed on compassionate grounds. He, therefore, prays for setting-aside
of the impugned order and for reinstatement of the petitioner in service.
4 . This Court issued notice to the respondents on 01.10.2021.
Thereafter, time was granted to the respondents to file reply on 08.01.2025,
20.05.2025, 24.06.2025 and lastly on 28.07.2025 by way of last
indulgence. However, the reply is not filed so far. The matter is accordingly
heard based upon the material available on record.
5. Learned Govt. Advocate supports the impugned order and submitted
that for appointment on compassionate ground also, the petitioner was
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:19316
3 WP-29661-2024
required to satisfy the necessary qualifications for appointment on the post of
Laboratory Teacher. He submits that the petitioner's appointment was found
to be illegal on the ground that the petitioner had not completed 21 years of
age on the date of appointment. He further submitted that since now the
petitioner has completed 21 years of age, the matter may be remitted to the
respondent-District Education Officer, Guna to consider the petitioner's
appointment on compassionate ground.
6. Considered the arguments and perused the record.
7. The object of appointment on compassionate ground is well defined
by the Apex Court in catena of judgments. It is granted in order to enable the
family of deceased-employee to mitigate the sudden financial crises that has
fallen upon the family on account of the death of bread earner. Thus, the
compassionate appointment has been an acceptable mode of appointment
which is an exception to the regular mode of appointment under the rules.
Therefore, strict adherence to compliance of necessary requisites for
appointment regarding age criteria is not warranted in the case of
compassionate appointment. In the present case also, the petitioner was
found entitled to compassionate appointment based upon the financial status
of the family. Therefore, the cancellation of his appointment merely on the
ground that on the date of appointment, he had not completed 21 years of age
was not warranted. The District Education Officer has referred to
recommendation of Five Member Committee who has examined the
appointment of petitioner and has found him ineligible as he has not
completed 21 years of age. Such re-examination of petitioner's appointment
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:19316
4 WP-29661-2024
was not in fact warranted after he had already been appointed and started
working. This Court is, therefore, of opinion that cancellation of petitioner's
appointment solely on the ground that the petitioner had not completed 21
years of age on the date of appointment is unsustainable and contrary to the
object of grant of compassionate appointment.
8 . Consequently, the order, dated 13.07.2021, (Annexure P/1) is set-
aside. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner on his post of
Laboratory Teacher.
9. Let necessary be done within a period of 90 days from the date of
submission of certified copy of this order.
10. The petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.
(ASHISH SHROTI)
JUDGE
vpn/-
