Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Pallavi G.M., filed a writ appeal against the order of a learned Single Judge dismissing her writ petition seeking appointment on compassionate ground following the death of her brother while in service. The appellant contended that she was dependent on her deceased brother and thus entitled to compassionate appointment. The respondents, Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (KPTCL) and Bangalore Electricity Supply Company (BESCOM), opposed the appeal, arguing that the scheme for compassionate appointment does not include siblings as eligible dependents. The Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka, comprising the Chief Justice and Justice Krishna S Dixit, heard the appeal. The court noted that compassionate appointment is not a vested right but an exception to the general rule of public employment, intended to provide immediate relief to the family of the deceased employee. The court observed that the relevant scheme did not provide for appointment of siblings. The appellant failed to demonstrate any legal right or entitlement under the scheme. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal, affirming the order of the Single Judge. The court held that the appellant, being a sister, was not eligible for compassionate appointment under the applicable scheme.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Compassionate Appointment - Entitlement of Sibling - Compassionate appointment is not a vested right but a concession to mitigate the hardship caused by the sudden death of the government servant. The scheme for compassionate appointment must be strictly construed. A sibling is not entitled to compassionate appointment unless the scheme specifically includes siblings as eligible dependents. In this case, the appellant, sister of the deceased employee, was denied appointment as the scheme did not provide for siblings. The court upheld the denial, holding that the appellant failed to establish any legal right to such appointment. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant, being the sister of the deceased employee, is entitled to appointment on compassionate ground under the relevant scheme.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The order of the learned Single Judge dated 30.03.2023 in W.P.No.9845/2022 is upheld.
Law Points
- Compassionate appointment is not a vested right
- Appointment on compassionate ground is an exception to the general rule of public employment
- Sibling is not entitled to compassionate appointment unless the scheme specifically provides for it
