Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Vishal Ravindra Wagh, filed a writ petition seeking compassionate appointment as the nephew of the deceased employee, Vijay Ratan Wagh, who worked as a Peon with the Command Area Development Authority (CADA) and died on 14.05.2009. The deceased's widow, Smt. Asha, was receiving pension and service benefits. The deceased's two sons, Vinod and Himmat, both unmarried, had passed away in 2022 and 2021 respectively. The widow recommended the petitioner for compassionate appointment. However, the Assistant Superintending Engineer rejected the proposal on 24.07.2024, holding that the petitioner was not an eligible candidate under the Government Resolution (GR) dated 29.09.2017. The petitioner relied on Clause 4 (A & AA) of the GR, arguing that Clause-AA allows the widow to nominate any person. The court rejected this argument, holding that Clause-A clearly lists the eligible blood relatives: spouse, children (married/unmarried), adopted child, daughter-in-law (if son not alive), divorced/destitute/widowed daughter or sister, and brother/sister only if the deceased was unmarried. Clause-AA must be read with Clause-A, meaning the nomination can only be from among those eligible categories. The petitioner, being a nephew, does not fall within any category. The court also noted that the petitioner did not disclose his biological father's source of income, was not adopted by the deceased, and did not plead dependency. The court emphasized that compassionate appointment is not a right but a scheme to provide immediate financial relief to the family in penury, and it is not akin to a Project Affected Person (PAP) scheme. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Compassionate Appointment - Eligibility - Government Resolution Interpretation - Clause 4 (A & AA) of GR dated 29.09.2017 - The petitioner, nephew of the deceased employee, sought compassionate appointment based on nomination by the widow. The court held that Clause-A lists the eligible categories of blood relatives (spouse, children, adopted child, daughter-in-law, divorced/destitute/widowed daughter/sister, and brother/sister only if deceased was unmarried). Clause-AA permits nomination only from among those eligible categories. Since the nephew does not fall within any category, he is not eligible. The impugned order rejecting his claim was upheld. (Paras 6-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a nephew of a deceased government employee is eligible for compassionate appointment under Clause 4 (A & AA) of the Government Resolution dated 29.09.2017.
Final Decision
The writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs. The court upheld the impugned order rejecting the petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment.
Law Points
- Compassionate appointment is not a right
- Government Resolution interpretation
- Eligible categories of blood relatives
- Clause-A and Clause-AA must be read together
- Nephew not eligible
