State of Rajasthan vs Chandra Narain Verma

Special leave granted,

The father of the respondent having passed away the respondent sought appointment in the Rajasthan Police Service as Sub-Inspector on compassionate ground. The authorities could not accede to his request as he had crossed the prescribed age limit (including relaxation) for the post of Sub-Inspector of Police. The authorities, therefore, offered him the post of Lower Division Clerk for which upper age limit is 31. The respondent instead of accepting the same moved the High court by way of a writ petition. The High court allowed the writ petition and directed that he be given appointment as Sub-Inspector of Police ignoring the age limit prescribed under the Rajasthan Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1989. The special appeal to the division bench was dismissed and hence this appeal.

We have heard counsel on both sides. It is one thing to say that a family member of the deceased is entitled to appointment on compassionate ground, but it is altogether a different thing to say that his appointment should be made regardless of the rules. Since he had crossed the maximum age prescribed for the post of Sub-Inspector of Police, the authorities were fully justified in offering him the post of Lower Division Clerk, which he Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 1848 of 1993 should have accepted. We fail to see how the High court could in the face of the rules direct the authorities to make his appointment as Sub-Inspector of a Police. We, therefore, cannot allow the order to stand. We set aside the order of the learned Single Judge as well as the division bench and direct that the respondent may join as Lower Division Clerk, if he so desires, within four weeks from today. Any appointment made on pain of contempt proceedings pursuant to the impugned judgment may be cancelled. The appeal is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.