Facts
The applicant, Lalloo, is the son of Late Shri Mahipal, who served as a Permanent Mazdoor (Civilian) at the Central Ordnance Depot (COD), Chheoki, Allahabad.
Source reference: p. 2The father died in harness on January 22, 2010
Source reference: p. 2Following his death, the applicant applied for a compassionate appointment under the government scheme.
Source reference: p. 2His application was processed and placed before the Board of Officers at the Integrated Headquarters, Ministry of Defence (Army), for vacancies pertaining to the year 2009–2010
Source reference: p. 2–3The Board assessed 242 candidates based on financial parameters, including family income, terminal benefits, and liabilities.
Source reference: p. 4The applicant secured 54 marks and was ranked at Serial No. 174
Source reference: p. 4However, as only 41 vacancies were available under the 5% quota, only the top 41 candidates were recommended
Source reference: p. 4, 6The applicant challenged this decision, alleging arbitrariness and unfair assessment of his family’s financial distress
Source reference: p. 2, 4Issues
1. Whether the respondents acted arbitrarily or in violation of the compassionate appointment scheme by not recommending the applicant for appointment despite his family's financial hardship.
Source reference: p. 3, 82. Whether the applicant has a vested right to compassionate appointment regardless of his merit ranking and vacancy limitations.
Source reference: p. 6–7Law Applied
The Tribunal applied the Scheme for Compassionate Appointment issued by the Department of Personnel and Training (DOPT) via Office Memorandum dated 09.10.1998, specifically para 7(b), which limits such appointments to 5% of direct recruitment vacancies in Group ‘C’ or ‘D’ posts
Source reference: p. 5–6It relied on the Supreme Court precedent in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Shashi Kumar (2019) 3 SCC 653, which established that compassionate appointment is an exception to general recruitment rules, not a right, and must be granted strictly per the scheme
Source reference: p. 7Furthermore, it cited State of West Bengal v. Debabrata Tiwari (2023) SCC Online SC 219, which clarified that the objective of the scheme is to provide immediate succour to families in sudden financial crisis and is not a perennial source of recruitment
Source reference: p. 7–8Reasoning
The Tribunal examined the records and found that the respondents had followed a transparent, merit-based assessment procedure.
Source reference: p. 4The Board of Officers evaluated candidates using standardized parameters such as terminal benefits, property, and family pension
Source reference: p. 4The applicant’s score of 54 marks placed him at Serial No. 174, which was significantly lower than the cut-off required to secure one of the 41 available vacancies
Source reference: p. 6The Tribunal noted that the applicant’s family was receiving a pension, and while they claimed financial hardship, the comparative merit of other candidates was higher
Source reference: p. 4, 8The court reasoned that since the scheme is subject to vacancy availability and the relative indigence of all eligible applicants, the respondents' decision to appoint only the top 41 candidates was neither arbitrary nor illegal
Source reference: p. 6, 8The Tribunal emphasized that compassionate appointment is a concession for immediate relief and cannot be claimed as a matter of right after a significant lapse of time
Source reference: p. 7–8Holding
The Tribunal concluded that the applicant's case was duly considered by the competent authority in accordance with the applicable rules and that the merit-based selection process was fair
It held that the applicant failed to demonstrate any illegality or arbitrariness in the assessment or the final merit list
Source reference: p. 8Consequently, the Original Application was dismissed as devoid of merit, and no order as to costs was made
Source reference: p. 8All pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of
Source reference: p. 9Original Court PDF
LALLOO DECEASD REPRESENTED THROUGH LR RAKESH KUMARvsUnion Of India
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in