Death of govt employee does not entitle family for job: SC
22 Aug 2013 5:04 AM IST
The Supreme Court has said that mere death of a government employee in harness does not entitle the family to claim compassionate employment. It set aside the reasoning given by the single judge as well as the division bench of the Rajasthan high court, which had asked MGB Gramin Bank to give employment to the son of its employee who had died while in harness. The court also said that an ameliorating relief should not be taken as opening an alternative mode of recruitment to public employment.
A bench comprising of Justice B S Chauhan and Justice S A Bobde said that every appointment to public office must be made by strictly adhering to the mandatory requirements of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
‘An exception by providing employment on compassionate grounds has been carved out in order to remove the financial constraints on the bereaved family, which has lost its bread-earner. Mere death of a government employee in harness does not entitle the family to claim compassionate employment. The competent authority has to examine the financial condition of the family of the deceased employee and it is only if it is satisfied that without providing 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. More so, the person claiming such appointment must possess required eligibility for the post,’ said the court.
The case – father of one Chakrawarti Singh was working as a Class III employee with MGB Gramin Bank and he died in 2006 while in harness. Singh applied for compassionate appointment. During the pendency of his application, a new scheme came into force.
The clause in the scheme provided that all applications pending on the date of commencement of the scheme shall be considered for grant of ex-gratia payment to the family instead of compassionate appointment. Singh was denied appointment and he approached the high court, which gave relief to Singh. Later the bank went to the double bench of the high court and here also the bank lost. After this the bank challenged it in the Supreme Court.
While setting aside the reasoning given by the high court, the court said that Singh may apply for consideration of his case under the new scheme.
A bench comprising of Justice B S Chauhan and Justice S A Bobde said that every appointment to public office must be made by strictly adhering to the mandatory requirements of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
‘An exception by providing employment on compassionate grounds has been carved out in order to remove the financial constraints on the bereaved family, which has lost its bread-earner. Mere death of a government employee in harness does not entitle the family to claim compassionate employment. The competent authority has to examine the financial condition of the family of the deceased employee and it is only if it is satisfied that without providing 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. More so, the person claiming such appointment must possess required eligibility for the post,’ said the court.
The case – father of one Chakrawarti Singh was working as a Class III employee with MGB Gramin Bank and he died in 2006 while in harness. Singh applied for compassionate appointment. During the pendency of his application, a new scheme came into force.
The clause in the scheme provided that all applications pending on the date of commencement of the scheme shall be considered for grant of ex-gratia payment to the family instead of compassionate appointment. Singh was denied appointment and he approached the high court, which gave relief to Singh. Later the bank went to the double bench of the high court and here also the bank lost. After this the bank challenged it in the Supreme Court.
While setting aside the reasoning given by the high court, the court said that Singh may apply for consideration of his case under the new scheme.
Next Story
