No right to compassionate appointment in absence of undue hardship, Allahabad HC

In an order passed recently, the Allahabad High Court reiterated that no family member can claim a right to compassionate appointment after the lapse of a reasonably long period following the death of the government employee..The same cannot be claimed in the absence of any proven need to relieve immediate hardship,.Justice Sangeeta Chandra made note of the settled law on this aspect while dismissing a petition preferred by the son of a Class IV government employee who had died in harness in 1996..The petitioner was only three years old when his father died. Although the petitioner attained majority in 2011, he only applied for a job on compassionate grounds in 2013, seventeen years after his father’s death..In order to get his application approved, the petitioner initially filed a miscellaneous petition in May 2013. However, this petition was disposed of by the Court without going into the merits of the case. The Court only issued a direction to the State Government that it consider whether the delay by the petitioner in applying for the compassionate appointment could be condoned under the State’s Rules..By an order passed in August 2013, the State Government rejected the petitioner’s application, prompting him to approach the High Court again..Justice Chandra, ruled in favour of the state, noting that the Full Judge Bench judgment of the Court in Shiv Kumar Dubey and others v. State of UP was squarely applicable in the instant case..In Shiv Kumar Dubey’s case, the Full Bench referred to a range of Supreme Court precedents emphasizing on the purpose underlying compassionate appointments, i.e. to tide over a sudden financial crisis or to relieve the unexpected hardship and distress caused to the family by the sudden demise of an earning member. It is an exception to the general rule of open recruitment..The case also noted that in exceptional cases, the Rule 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servant Dying in Harness Rules does allow for some relaxation in the time taken to file an application for compassionate appointment..However, such relaxation can only be allowed after the Government is satisfied that the applicant has made out a case of undue hardship or continued penurious condition. Such continuing hardship has to be proved in writing and with supporting documentary and other proof..Since no such hardship was apparent in the instant case, the Court noted that the petitioner could not make a claim for compassionate appointment. As noted in the order,.“The petitioner attained majority in 2011 but he moved the application only in 2013 after completing his graduation. He should have made the application immediately..Moving the application after 17 years of the death of the deceased government servant would mean that the immediate hardship faced by the dependent of the deceased employee was over. No case for interference in the impugned order is made out.”.With this observation, the Court dismissed the petition..Advocate Sunil Kumar Srivastava appeared for the petitioner. The state was represented by advocate Pranjal Mehrotra..Read the order: