Chandan Kumar vs That State of Bihar
- Court
- Patna High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Letters Patent Appeal No.1410 of 2023
In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4246 of 2023
======================================================
Chandan Kumar Late Panchadev Hazra @ panchdev Paswan Resident of
Ward No. 11, Barohiya, P.S.- Chanpatia, District- West Champaran.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. That State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Home (Police)
Department, Bihar, Patna.
2. The Home Secretary, Home (Police) Department, Bihar, Patna.
3. The Under Secretary, Home (Police) Department, Bihar, Patna.
4. The District Magistrate, West Champaran at Bettiah.
5. The In-Charge Officer, District General Section, West Champaran at Bettiah.
6. The Superintendent of Police, West Champaran at Bettiah.
7. The Anchal Adhikari, Circle- Chanpatia, West Champaran.
8. The Officer-in-Charge, Chanpatia Police Station, West Champaran.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Jainendra Kumar Pushkar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, AC to AAG-3
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH)
Date: 02-09-2026
Re: I.A. No. 01 of 2024
The present interlocutory application has been filed
for condonation of delay of 170 days in filing the present
appeal.
2. The learned counsel for the respondents has not
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1410 of 2023 dt.02-09-2026
2/14
opposed the present petition.
3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of
the case and considering the averments made in the present
petition, we are satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown
so as to warrant condonation of delay of 170 days in filing the
appeal. Consequently, the delay which has taken place in
preferring the present appeal is hereby condoned.
4. I.A. No. 01 of 2024 stands allowed.
Re: L.P.A. No. 1410 of 2023
5. The present appeal has been filed against the
order dated 26.04.2023 passed by the Ld. Single Judge of this
Court in C.W.J.C. No. 4246 of 2023, whereby and whereunder
the writ application has been dismissed in light of the
judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs. State of Haryana , reported in
( 1994) 4 SCC 138 .
6. The brief facts of the case according to the
appellant are that his father died in harness on 12.10.2009
while posted as Chowkidar under Chanpatia Police Station,
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1410 of 2023 dt.02-09-2026
3/14
West Champaran leaving behind his wife and two minor sons.
Thereafter, the mother of the appellant had filed a
representation for accommodating her brother-in-law &
granting him appointment on compassionate ground, since the
appellant was minor, however there being no such scheme,
such request of the mother of the appellant was rejected vide
order dt. 14.06.2016 passed by the Compassionate
Appointment Committee of the District of West Champaran,
Bettiah on the ground that in case of married Govt. servant,
the younger brother of the deceased employee is not
considered as a dependent for appointment on compassionate
ground. Nonetheless, after the appellant attained majority and
had passed the matriculation examination, his mother filed yet
another application on 21.08.2020 for grant of compassionate
appointment to the appellant, however since there was no
response, the appellant had filed the connected writ petition
bearing C.W.J.C. No. 4246 of 2023 but the same has been
dismissed by the Ld. Single Judge of this Court vide order dt.
26.04.2023 on the ground of non-disclosure of the date of
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1410 of 2023 dt.02-09-2026
4/14
attaining majority of the elder son in the said application and
there being no categorical statement about him being
employed or not as also in light of the judgment rendered by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal
(supra).
7. The learned counsel for the appellant has
submitted that at the time of death of his father, the appellant
was minor, however after attaining majority and passing the
matriculation examination, his mother had filed an application
on 21.09.2020 for grant of compassionate appointment to the
appellant but the respondents have illegally not considered the
same. The learned counsel for the appellant has relied on a
judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Syed Khadim Hussain v. State of Bihar , reported in (2006) 9
SCC 195 to contend that in somewhat similar circumstances,
relief has been granted to the appellant of the said case, hence
the respondents be directed to appoint the appellant on
compassionate ground.
8 . Per contra, the learned counsel for the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1410 of 2023 dt.02-09-2026
5/14
respondents has submitted that the deceased employee i.e. the
father of the appellant died in harness on 12.10.2009 while
working on the post of Chowkidar at Chanpatia Police
Station, whereafter the mother of the appellant had applied for
appointment of her brother-in-law on the post of Chowkidar ,
however the same was rejected by the Compassionate
Appointment Committee , West Champaran at Bettiah vide
minutes of meeting dated 16.1.2012, which has not been
challenged till date. In fact, the respondents had, vide letter
dated 10.03.2012 while returning the nomination letter of the
mother of the appellant had asked her to file an application for
appointment on compassionate ground within forty-five days,
th
of such dependent member of the deceased who was 10 pass,
however no such application was filed either by the mother of
the appellant or the appellant. Thereafter, the mother of the
appellant had again applied for appointment of her brother-in-
th
law, after his attaining the qualification of 10 ( Madhyma ),
however the same was again rejected by the Compassionate
Appointment Committee , West Champaran at Bettiah vide
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1410 of 2023 dt.02-09-2026
6/14
minutes of meeting dated 08.02.2016, issued vide memo dated
14.06.2016 on the ground that in case of married deceased
government servant, the younger brother of the deceased is
not considered as a dependent for appointment on
compassionate ground and the same has also not been
challenged till date.
9. It is the case of the respondents that the mother of
the appellant had again submitted an application for grant of
compassionate appointment to the appellant in the year 2020,
however the same was not entertained on the ground that the
time prescribed for submission of application for appointment
on compassionate ground is within five years of death of the
deceased employee but the application was submitted
belatedly. Accordingly, the In-Charge Officer, District General
Branch, W. Champaran, Bettiah had rejected the said
application & returned the entire records, vide order dt.
15.5.2023, to the Circle Officer, Chanpatia, which has also not
been challenged. Thus, it is submitted that there is no illegality
in the impugned order dt. 26.04.2023, hence the present
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1410 of 2023 dt.02-09-2026
7/14
appeal is fit to be dismissed.
10. We have heard the learned counsel for the
parties and perused the materials on record, from which it
transpires that the facts of the case lie in a narrow encompass
inasmuch as the deceased employee i.e. the father of the
appellant died in harness on 12.10.2009, whereafter the
mother of the appellant had twice made applications for
appointing her brother-in-law on compassionate ground,
however the same were rejected vide minutes of meeting dated
16.1.2012 & 08.2.2016 on the ground that the brother of
married deceased employee is not considered as a dependent
for compassionate employment. The mother of the appellant,
had yet again filed an application dt. 21.08.2020 stating
therein that her younger son be granted compassionate
employment, however the same was rejected, since the time
prescribed for submission of application for compassionate
employment is within 5 years of death of the deceased
employee but the application was submitted belatedly.
Accordingly, the In-Charge Officer, District General Branch,
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1410 of 2023 dt.02-09-2026
8/14
W. Champaran, Bettiah had rejected the aforesaid application
and returned the entire records, vide order dt. 15.5.2023, to the
Circle Officer, Chanpatia, which has also not been challenged
till date.
11. We find that it is a well settled law, as has been
propounded by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Umesh
Kumar Nagpal (supra), that the object of granting
compassionate employment is to enable the bereaved family
to tide over the immediate financial crisis, which it faces on
account of sudden death of the breadwinner, however the
object is not to give the member of such family a post held by
the deceased or for that matter any other post, apart from the
fact that mere death of an employee in harness does not entitle
his family to such source of livelihood. Moreover,
compassionate appointment is neither a vested right nor an
alternate mode of employment. It may be relevant to
reproduce paragraph No. 6 of the judgment rendered by the
Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal
(supra) herein below:-
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1410 of 2023 dt.02-09-2026
9/14
“ 6. For these very reasons, the
compassionate employment cannot be granted
after a lapse of a reasonable period which
must be specified in the rules. The
consideration for such employment is not a
vested right which can be exercised at any time
in future. The object being to enable the family
to get over, the financial crisis which it faces at
the time of the death of the sole breadwinner,
the compassionate employment cannot be
claimed and offered whatever the lapse of time
and after the crisis is over.”
12. At this juncture, it would be apt to refer to yet
another judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the
case of Central Coalfields Limited and Others vs Parden
Oraon , reported in (2021) 16 SCC 384 , paragraph no. 8 and 9
whereof are reproduced herein below:-
“ 8. The whole object of granting
compassionate appointment is to enable the
family to tide over the sudden crisis which
arises due to the death of the sole breadwinner.
The mere death of an employee in harness does
not entitle his family to such source of
livelihood. The authority concerned has to
examine the financial condition of the family of
the deceased, and it is only if it is satisfied that
but for the provision of employment, the family
will not be able to meet the crisis that the job is
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1410 of 2023 dt.02-09-2026
10/14
offered to the eligible member of the family. It
was further asseverated in the said judgment
that compassionate employment cannot be
granted after a lapse of reasonable period as
the consideration of such employment is not a
vested right which can be exercised at any time
in the future. It was further held that the object
of compassionate appointment is to enable the
family to get over the financial crisis that it
faces at the time of the death of sole
breadwinner, compassionate appointment
cannot be claimed or offered after a significant
lapse of time and after the crisis is over.
9. We are in agreement with the
High Court that the reasons given by the
employer for denying compassionate
appointment to the Respondent's son are not
justified. There is no bar in the National Coal
Wage Agreement for appointment of the son of
an employee who has suffered civil death. In
addition, merely because the respondent is
working, her son cannot be denied
compassionate appointment as per the relevant
clauses of the National Coal Wage Agreement.
However, the Respondent's husband is missing
since 2002. Two sons of the Respondent who
are the dependents of her husband as per the
records, are also shown as dependents of the
Respondent. It cannot be said that there was
any financial crisis created immediately after
Respondent's husband went missing in view of
the employment of the Respondent. Though the
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1410 of 2023 dt.02-09-2026
11/14
reasons given by the employer to deny the
relief sought by the Respondent are not
sustainable, we are convinced that the
Respondent's son cannot be given
compassionate appointment at this point of
time. The application for compassionate
appointment of the son was filed by the
Respondent in the year 2013 which is more
than 10 years after the Respondent's husband
had gone missing. As the object of
compassionate appointment is for providing
immediate succour to the family of a deceased
employee, the Respondent's son is not entitled
for compassionate appointment after the
passage of a long period of time since his
father has gone missing.”
13. Now coming back to the present case, we find
that the death of the father of the appellant took place in the
year 2009 and now almost 17 years have passed by apart from
the fact that initially the mother of the appellant was interested
in getting her brother-in-law appointed on compassionate
ground, however since there was no such provision in the
scheme of compassionate appointment, the said application
filed by the mother of the appellant was rejected. Thereafter,
belatedly in the year 2020 i.e. after almost 11 years, another
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1410 of 2023 dt.02-09-2026
12/14
application was filed by the mother of the appellant for grant
of compassionate appointment to the appellant. Therefore, two
things arise for consideration, first that neither the minutes of
meeting dated 16.01.2012 nor the one dated 08.02.2016 of the
Compassionate Appointment Committee, West Champaran,
Bettiah nor the rejection of the case of the appellant vide order
dated 15.05.2023 have ever been challenged. Secondly, we
find that a long period of time, i.e. about 17 years has now
elapsed since the death of the father of the appellant, hence
compassionate appointment cannot be granted to him,
inasmuch as the object behind providing appointment on
compassionate ground is to enable the family to tide over the
immediate financial crisis.
14. It is a well settled law that if an application on
compassionate ground is entertained after a long delay, other
cases of similar nature may arise, where grant of immediate
relief by providing employment to the dependent of the
deceased employees may crop up, hence what is material for
consideration is the time when the relief is to be granted to a
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1410 of 2023 dt.02-09-2026
13/14
family in distress and not to reserving a job for one of the
dependents. Thus, the appellant is not entitled to any relief
inasmuch as compassionate appointment cannot be granted to
him after a lapse of about 17 years of the death of his father,
and moreover, compassionate employment cannot be claimed
as a matter of right after lapse of so many years, i.e 17 years
in the present case, since compassionate appointment is
neither a vested right nor an alternate mode of appointment.
15. As far as reliance placed by the learned counsel
for the appellant on a judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of Syed Khadim Hussain (supra) is
concerned, the same is misplaced, inasmuch as firstly in the
said case during the pendency of the application for
compassionate employment, i.e. before rejection of the
application, the applicant had crossed 18 years of age, hence it
was opined that the applicant could have been considered for
compassionate employment but this is not the case here.
Secondly, the judgment has been passed in the peculiar facts
and circumstances of the said case, hence the same cannot be
Patna High Court L.P.A No.1410 of 2023 dt.02-09-2026
14/14
treated as a precedent.
16. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of
the case and for the foregoing reasons we do not find an
illegality in the impugned order dated 26.04.2023 passed by
the learned Single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 4246 of
2023, hence the present appeal stands dismissed.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
sweta/aditya-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 07.09.2026
Transmission Date NA