Recipient of multiple family pensions is ineligible for compassionate appointment as indigent circumstances are not established.

The husband of the first respondent, late Mosanna, an employee of Southern Railways, died in service in 2001.

His elder son was granted a compassionate appointment in 2004 but died in 2016 after 11 years of service.

Following the son's death, the respondent mother began receiving two family pensions—one for her husband and one for her elder son.

She then applied for a second compassionate appointment for her younger son, aged 35.

The Railways rejected the claim on August 13, 2019, on the grounds that the younger son was not a dependent of the deceased elder brother, the family was not in indigent circumstances, and the respondent was receiving two pensions.

The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Madras Bench, set aside the rejection in O.A. No. 115 of 2020. The Union of India challenged the CAT order via this writ petition.

1. Whether a family is entitled to a second compassionate appointment when the first appointee dies after a substantial period of service and the family is receiving multiple pensions.

2. Whether the younger son of the original deceased employee can be deemed a legal "dependent" of his deceased elder brother for the purposes of the Railway Rules on compassionate appointment.

The court applied the fundamental principles of the Compassionate Appointment Scheme, which is a welfare measure aimed at mitigating the immediate financial crisis resulting from the sudden death of a breadwinner.

The scheme is not intended to provide a permanent source of serial employment for a family but is contingent upon "indigent circumstances".

Definition of "dependant" under the Railways Rules, which requires the claimant to be included in the family composition register and to have been truly dependent on the deceased employee.

The court found that the Railways' rejection was justified as the respondent’s younger son, aged 35, was neither infirm nor incapacitated and had not been listed as a dependent in the family composition register of the elder son.

The court reasoned that since the elder son had served for 11 years before his death and the mother was already supported by two separate family pensions, the core requirement of "financial crisis" or "indigent circumstances" was not met.

The court determined that the CAT's directions ran counter to the specific terms and conditions of the Compassionate Appointment Scheme, which is an exception to the general rule of public recruitment and must be strictly construed.

The High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 28.02.2023. No costs were awarded.