### Compassionate Appointment Applications Must Be Carried Forward Annually Despite Initial Rejection for Lack of Vacancies

The applicant’s father, a Postman in the Respondent Department, died in harness on 04.02.2014

The applicant applied for compassionate appointment, supported by a ‘No Objection’ affidavit from his mother

Respondent No. 3 requested details regarding the family's income and property, which the applicant provided via a Tehsildar certificate

On 12.09.2017, the respondents rejected the claim because the applicant secured only 49 merit points compared to the selected candidate’s 65, and vacancies were limited to the 5% quota

The applicant challenged this, arguing that under DoPT guidelines, the three-year limit for consideration had been withdrawn and his case should be reconsidered in subsequent years

1. Whether the respondents were justified in considering the applicant’s case only once and rejecting it permanently due to a lack of vacancies in a specific year

2. Whether the merit points were correctly calculated regarding the applicant's income and immovable property

The court applied DoPT OM No. F. No. 14014/3/2001-Estt (D) dated 26.07.2012, which withdrew the previous three-year time limit for compassionate appointment cases

DoPT Instruction No. 14.014/02/2012-Estt. (d) dated 30.11.2013, which clarifies that requests for compassionate appointment can be carried forward to subsequent years subject to the 5% quota

The principle that judicial review is limited to the fairness of the decision-making process rather than the entitlement itself, as established in Union of India v. M.T. Latheesh (2006)

The Tribunal observed that while the applicant scored 49 marks and was not the most deserving candidate for the 2017-18 cycle, the respondents erred in treating the rejection as final

Under the 2012 and 2013 DoPT guidelines, the expiration of a specific time limit (previously three years) means that an indigent family's request can be reconsidered in following years if vacancies within the 5% quota arise

The Tribunal also noted discrepancies regarding the income certificate of Rs. 60,000/- per annum and the assessment of the applicant's "Kaccha House," suggesting that the merit point allocation required a fair re-evaluation

The Tribunal emphasized that a "fair chance for reconsideration" is a right under the current administrative instructions

It held that the stand that a case can only be considered once is misplaced in light of the 2012 DoPT OM

The Respondents were directed to reconsider the applicant’s case for compassionate appointment within 60 days, taking into account the income certificate issued by the Tehsildar Jabalpur

No costs were awarded