Shanti Devi vs The State of Jharkhand and Others

Alok Singh

After the death of Late Bhahmdeo Singh, Jeep Driver, in harness on 18.09.2002. Petitioner was appointed on compassionate ground, vide order dated 16.08.2005 (Annexure- 2 to the writ petition). Thereafter, vide order dated 11.11.2006 (Annexure- 3), compassionate appointment offered and given to the petitioner was revoked on the ground that Smt. Brahmansia Devi, first legally wedded wife of Late Bhahmdeo Singh, Jeep Driver, is still alive. Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that first wife of Late Bhahmdeo Singh, namely, Smt. Brahmansia Devi, has given consent to provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner, second wife of Late Bhahmdeo Singh, stating that since she has crossed 45 years of age, therefore, not entitled for the compassionate appointment, as such, compassionate appointment should be given to the second wife of Late Bhahmdeo Singh. Mr. Sahani further contends that despite such no objection/ consent by the first wife, compassionate appointment has been denied to the petitioner.

There is no dispute on the question that petitioner is claiming herself to be second wife of Late Bhahmdeo Singh; first legally wedded wife of Late Bhahmdeo Singh is still alive.

Hon''ble Apex Court, in the case of Bhawani Prasad Sonkar Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others, , in paragraph Nos. 18, 19 and 20, has held as under: -

Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Madhusudan Das and Others,

This Court in a large number of decisions has held that the appointment on compassionate ground cannot be claimed as a matter of right It must be provided for in the rules. The criteria laid down therefor viz. that the death of the sole bread earner of the family, must be established. It is meant to provide for a minimum relief when such contentions are raised, the constitutional philosophy of equality behind making such a scheme be taken into consideration. Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India mandate that all eligible candidates should be considered for appointment in the posts which have fallen vacant. Appointment on compassionate ground offered to a dependant of a deceased employee is an exception to the said rule. It is a concession, not a right."

In V. Sivamurthy vs. State of A.P., this Court while observing that although appointment in public service should be made strictly on the basis of open invitation of applications and comparative merit, having regard to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, yet appointments on compassionate grounds are well-recognised exception to the general rule, carved out in the interest of justice to meet certain contingencies, highlighted the following two well-recognised contingencies as exceptions to the general rule: (SCC p. 741, para 18)

(i) appointment on compassionate grounds to meet the sudden crisis occurring in a family on account of the death of the breadwinner while in service.

(ii) appointment on compassionate ground to meet the crisis in a family on account of medical invalidation of the breadwinner.

Thus, while considering a claim for employment on compassionate ground, the following factors have to be borne in mind:

(i) Compassionate employment cannot be made in the absence of rules or regulations issued by the Government or a public authority, the request is to be considered strictly in accordance with the governing scheme and no discretion as such is left with any authority to make compassionate appointment dehors the scheme.

(ii) An application for compassionate employment must be preferred without undue delay and has to be considered within a reasonable period of time.

(iii) An appointment on compassionate ground is to meet the sudden crises occurring in the family on account of the death or medical invalidation of the breadwinner while in service. Therefore, compassionate employment cannot be granted as a matter of course by way of largesse irrespective of the financial condition of the deceased/ incapacitated employee''s family at the time of his death or incapacity, as the case may be.

(iv) Compassionate employment is permissible only to one of the dependants of the deceased/incapacitated employee viz. parents, spouse, son or daughter and not to all relatives, and such appointments should be only to the lowest category that is Class III and IV posts.

Thus, it is now settled position of law that compassionate appointment is an exception to the mandate of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India; compassionate appointment is a concession, not a right; compassionate appointment can be given in accordance with statutory schemes, Rules and Regulations; compassionate appointment cannot be given as a matter of course by way of largessee.

Alleged marriage of the petitioner with Late Bhahmdeo Singh, is ipso facto illegal and void, in view of the admitted fact that his first wife is still alive. Ipso fact, illegal and void marriage cannot be regularised simply because first wife approves or does not challenge the second marriage of her husband. Therefore, marriage of the petitioner with Late Bhahmdeo Singh cannot be treated as valid marriage.

Since, compassionate appointment is a concession and not a right, therefore, no mandamus shall be issued to the Authority to consider or grant compassionate appointment to the second wife. Therefore, present petition fails and is hereby dismissed.