Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Compassionate Appointment Based on Compulsory Retirement of Father. Compulsory retirement does not constitute death or medical invalidation required for compassionate appointment under Government Circulars.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: GOA
  • 87
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner No. 1, Rajendra Dattatraya Sawarkar, filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents to consider his case for appointment on compassionate grounds. His father, petitioner No. 2 (since deleted), was a Class III employee with the Maharashtra Water Supply and Sewerage Board and was compulsorily retired from service with effect from 1 October 1987. On 26 February 1991, petitioner No. 2 submitted an application for compassionate appointment for his son, but no action was taken. Petitioner No. 1 submitted another application on 15 April 1994. The respondents did not respond, leading to the filing of the writ petition. The petitioners relied on Government Circular dated 22 October 1990 and Government Resolution dated 26 October 1994. The court examined the scheme of compassionate appointment and noted that it is an exception to the general rule of open recruitment, intended to provide immediate financial relief to the family of a government servant who dies or is medically invalidated while in service. The court held that compulsory retirement does not fall within the ambit of compassionate appointment, as the scheme is not meant for such cases. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Compassionate Appointment - Compulsory Retirement - The petitioner sought appointment on compassionate ground after his father was compulsorily retired from service. The court held that compassionate appointment is an exception to the general rule of open recruitment, intended to provide immediate financial relief to the family of a government servant who dies or is medically invalidated while in service. Compulsory retirement does not fall within the ambit of compassionate appointment. The petition was dismissed. (Paras 1-6)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to compassionate appointment on the ground that his father was prematurely/compulsorily retired from service.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Compassionate appointment is an exception to the general rule of open recruitment
  • intended to provide immediate financial relief to the family of a government servant who dies or is medically invalidated while in service. It cannot be claimed as a matter of right
  • and the scheme must be strictly construed. Compulsory retirement does not fall within the ambit of compassionate appointment.
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2006 LawText (BOM) (06) 102

Writ Petition No. 376 of 1998

2006-06-06

D.D. Sinha, R.C. Chavan

M.W. Harsulkar for Petitioners, D.M. Kakani for Respondents 2 & 3

Rajendra Dattatraya Sawarkar

State of Maharashtra, Member Secretary, Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran, Superintending Engineer, Maharashtra Water Supply and Sewerage Board, Dinesh Prabhakar Mudliar

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition seeking direction for compassionate appointment.

Remedy Sought

Direction to respondents to consider petitioner No. 1 for appointment on compassionate ground.

Filing Reason

Respondents did not act on applications for compassionate appointment after petitioner No. 2 was compulsorily retired.

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to compassionate appointment on the ground that his father was prematurely/compulsorily retired from service.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners submitted that petitioner No. 2 was compulsorily retired and applications for compassionate appointment were made but not acted upon.

Ratio Decidendi

Compassionate appointment is an exception to the general rule of open recruitment, intended to provide immediate financial relief to the family of a government servant who dies or is medically invalidated while in service. Compulsory retirement does not fall within the ambit of compassionate appointment.

Judgment Excerpts

Compassionate appointment is an exception to the general rule of open recruitment, intended to provide immediate financial relief to the family of a government servant who dies or is medically invalidated while in service. Compulsory retirement does not fall within the ambit of compassionate appointment.

Procedural History

Petitioner No. 2 was compulsorily retired w.e.f. 1.10.1987. Application for compassionate appointment for petitioner No. 1 was made on 26.2.1991 and again on 15.4.1994. No action was taken, leading to the filing of the writ petition in 1998.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Appellants in Murder Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence and Doubtful Identification. Conviction under Section 302 IPC Set Aside as Prosecution Failed to Prove Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Compassionate Appointment Based on Compulsory Retirement of Father. Compulsory retirement does not constitute death or medical invalidation required for compassionate appointment under Government Circ...