Madras High Court
S.Asha Nanthini vs The Joint Registrar on 23 February, 2022
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 23.02.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
S.Asha Nanthini ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Joint Registrar,
Co-operative Societies,
No.6103/2 Annavasal Salai,
Pudukkottai.
2.The Sub-Registrar,
Co-operative Societies,
Aranthangi Taluk,
Pudukkottai District.
3.The President/Secretary,
T-1494, Merpanaikadu Thodaka Velanmai
Kuturavu Kadan Sangam Limited., (PACCS)
Merpanaikadu Post,
Aranthangi Taluk,
Pudukottai District. ... Respondents
_________
Page 1 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records and proceedings of the second respondent in Na.Ka.1063/16/Aa2
dated 26.10.2017 and quash the same and consequently to direct the
respondents to appoint the petitioner in any suitable vacancy available in its
co-operative Societies by considering petitioner's name for employment on
compassionate ground by taking into account of her father's service and her
educational qualification within the period that may be stipulated by this
Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Yasmin Begum
For Respondent : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar
Additional Government Pleader
for RR1 & 2
No-appearance for R3
******
ORDER
The order of rejection rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner for
compassionate appointment in proceedings dated 26.10.2017 is under
challenge in the present Writ Petition.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
2. The petitioner states that her father namely Mr.Selvaraj, was
appointed as Sales man in the third respondent Co-operative Society on
daily wage basis and he was continuing in the Society. The father of the writ
petitioner died on 01.02.2015, while he was in service. Even at the time of
death, the father of the writ petitioner was continuing as daily wage
employee. Under these circumstances, the petitioner submitted an
application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. The application
submitted by the writ petitioner was considered by the respondent/Deputy
Registrar of Co-operative Societies, who in turn rejected the application by
stating that there is no record to show that the father of the writ petitioner
was working as regular employee of the Co-operative Society. His services
were not regularised. Therefore, as per the terms and conditions of the
scheme of compassionate appointment, the benefit cannot be granted. This
apart, the compassionate appointment is sought for by the petitioner in a Co-
operative Society which is not a State within the meaning of Article 12 of
the Constitution of India.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
3. The scheme of compassionate appointment was introduced to
mitigate the circumstances arising on account of sudden demise of the
Government Employee. Compassionate appointment is not a regular
appointment, nor an appointment under the constitutional scheme. It is a
concession granted to the Government employees on certain exceptional
circumstances. Thus, the compassionate appointment can never be claimed
as a matter of right and only if a person is entitled under the terms and
conditions, then alone the scheme can be extended, but not otherwise.
Equal opportunity in public employment is a constitutional mandate. All
appointments are to be made in accordance with the rules and by providing
equal opportunity to participate in the process of selection.
4. As far as the compassionate appointments are concerned, no
selection is conducted, no suitability or eligibility are tested, but persons are
appointed merely based on death of an employee. Therefore, compassionate
appointment is to be restricted in the interest of the efficient public
administration. No doubt, the Government has also restricted the
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
compassionate appointments and it is to be extended only to the deserving
family and more so, after a lapse of many years. Providing compassionate
appointment after a lapse of many years would not only defeat the purpose
and object of the scheme, but also the penurious circumstances arose on
account of the sudden death became vanished. Thus, the lapse of time is
also a ground to reject the claim for compassionate appointment. Number of
judgments are delivered by this Court and the Government has also issued
revised instructions for providing compassionate appointment in G.O.(Ms)
No.18, Labour and Employment (Q1) Department, dated 23.01.2020.
5. Even recently, the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of
State of Uttar Pradesh and Others vs. Premlata, reported in (2022) 1 SCC
30, has made observations in respect of implementation of the scheme of
compassionate appointment and the relevant portion of the observations are
extracted hereunder:
“8. While considering the issue involved in the
present appeal, the law laid down by this Court on
compassionate ground on the death of the deceased
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
employee are required to be referred to and considered. In
the recent decision, this Court in State of Karnataka vs.
V.Somayashree [(2021) 12 SCC 20], had occasion to
consider the principle governing the grant of appointment
on compassionate ground. After referring to the decision
of this Court in N.C.Santhosh vs. State of Karnataka
[(2020) 7 SCC 617], this Court has summarized the
principle governing the grant of appointment on
compassionate ground as under:
10.1. That the compassionate appointment is
an exception to the general rule;
10.2. That no aspirant has a right to
compassionate appointment;
10.3. The appointment to any public post in
the service of the State has to be made on the basis
of the principle in accordance with Articles 14 and
16 of the Constitution of India;
10.4. Appointment on compassionate ground
can be made only on fulfilling the norms laid down
by the State’s policy and/or satisfaction of the
eligibility criteria as per the policy;
10.5. The norms prevailing on the date of the
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
consideration of the application should be the basis
for consideration of claim for compassionate
appointment.
9. As per the law laid down by this Court in a catena of
decisions on the appointment on compassionate ground, for all
the government vacancies equal opportunity should be provided
to all aspirants as mandated under Articles 14 and 16 of the
Constitution. However, appointment on compassionate ground
offered to a dependent of a deceased employee is an exception
to the said norms. The compassionate ground is a concession
and not a right.
9.1. In the case of H.P. v. Shashi Kumar [(2019) 3 SCC
653], this Court in paras 21 and 26 had an occasion to consider
the object and purpose of appointment on compassionate
ground and considered decision of this Court in Govind
Prakash Verma v. LIC [(2005) 10 SCC 289], it is observed and
held as under:
“21. The decision in Govind Prakash
Verma, has been considered subsequently in
several decisions. But, before we advert to those
decisions, it is necessary to note that the nature of
compassionate appointment had been considered
by this Court in Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
Haryana [(1994) 4 SCC 138]. The principles
which have been laid down in Umesh Kumar
Nagpal have been subsequently followed in a
consistent line of precedents in this Court. These
principles are encapsulated in the following
extract:
“2. … As a rule, appointments in the public
services should be made strictly on the basis of
open invitation of applications and merit. No other
mode of appointment nor any other consideration
is permissible. Neither the Governments nor the
public authorities are at liberty to follow any other
procedure or relax the qualifications laid down by
the rules for the post. However, to this general rule
which is to be followed strictly in every case, there
are some exceptions carved out in the interests of
justice and to meet certain contingencies. One
such exception is in favour of the dependants of an
employee dying in harness and leaving his family
in penury and without any means of livelihood. In
such cases, out of pure humanitarian
consideration taking into consideration the fact
that unless some source of livelihood is provided,
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
the family would not be able to make both ends
meet, a provision is made in the rules to provide
gainful employment to one of the dependants of the
deceased who may be eligible for such
employment. The whole object of granting
compassionate employment is thus to enable the
family to tide over the sudden crisis. The object is
not to give a member of such family a post much
less a post for post held by the deceased. What is
further, mere death of an employee in harness does
not entitle his family to such source of livelihood.
The Government or the public authority concerned
has to examine the financial condition of the
family of the deceased, and it is only if it is
satisfied, that but for the provision of employment,
the family will not be able to meet the crisis that a
job is to be offered to the eligible member of the
family. The posts in Classes III and IV are the
lowest posts in non-manual and manual categories
and hence they alone can be offered on
compassionate grounds, the object being to relieve
the family, of the financial destitution and to help it
get over the emergency. The provision of
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
employment in such lowest posts by making an
exception to the rule is justifiable and valid since it
is not discriminatory. The favourable treatment
given to such dependant of the deceased employee
in such posts has a rational nexus with the object
sought to be achieved viz. relief against
destitution. No other posts are expected or
required to be given by the public authorities for
the purpose. It must be remembered in this
connection that as against the destitute family of
the deceased there are millions of other families
which are equally, if not more destitute. The
exception to the rule made in favour of the family
of the deceased employee is in consideration of the
services rendered by him and the legitimate
expectations, and the change in the status and
affairs, of the family engendered by the erstwhile
employment which are suddenly upturned.”
“26. The judgment of a Bench of two Judges
in Mumtaz Yunus Mulani v. State of Maharashtra
[Mumtaz Yunus Mulani v. State of Maharashtra,
(2008) 11 SCC 384 : (2008) 2 SCC (L&S) 1077]
has adopted the principle that appointment on
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
compassionate grounds is not a source of
recruitment, but a means to enable the family of the
deceased to get over a sudden financial crisis. The
financial position of the family would need to be
evaluated on the basis of the provisions contained
in the scheme. The decision in Govind Prakash
Verma [Govind Prakash Verma v. LIC, (2005) 10
SCC 289 : 2005 SCC (L&S) 590] has been duly
considered, but the Court observed that it did not
appear that the earlier binding precedents of this
Court have been taken note of in that case.”
6. Thus, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner has not
established any acceptable ground for the purpose of considering the relief
as sought for in the present Writ Petition. Furthermore, the father of the writ
petitioner was working as daily wage employee. Scheme of compassionate
appointment cannot be extended for temporary employee or daily wage
employee as per the Government policy.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. However, there
shall be no order as to costs.
23.02.2022
ssb
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
To
1.The Joint Registrar,
Co-operative Societies,
No.6103/2 Annavasal Salai,
Pudukkottai.
2.The Sub-Registrar,
Co-operative Societies,
Aranthangi Taluk,
Pudukkottai District.
3.The President/Secretary,
T-1494, Merpanaikadu Thodaka Velanmai
Kuturavu Kadan Sangam Limited., (PACCS)
Merpanaikadu Post,
Aranthangi Taluk,
Pudukottai District.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
ssb
W.P.(MD) No.1262 of 2020
23.02.2022
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
