Supreme Court Employment and Labour Law Constitutional Law

Rule 23(1) Barring Financial Assistance During Criminal Trials Does Not Apply to Compassionate Appointments

By LawLens SC Reporter · Supreme Court DeskDecided June 11, 2026Published 11 June 2026 at 5:16 pm ISTUpdated 10 August 2026 at 4:00 pm IST1 min read

The LawLens card for this judgment

In brief

The question

Whether Rule 23(1) of the Rules of 2019, which suspends "compassionate financial assistance" for family members charged with the murder of a government employee, also applies to claims for "compassionate appointment."

The court held

Rule 23(1) Barring Financial Assistance During Criminal Trials Does Not Apply to Compassionate Appointments

It also directed

The final order or relief granted by the court.

01Facts

The Appellant’s father, a government teacher, died in a road accident in 2021

p. 2

The Appellant’s mother was subsequently accused of conspiring in the murder and booked under Section 302 IPC

p. 2

Although she was later acquitted based on "benefit of doubt," a criminal appeal against her acquittal remains pending

p. 5

The Appellant applied for compassionate appointment under the Haryana Civil Services (Compassionate Financial Assistance or Appointment) Rules, 2019 ("Rules of 2019")

pp. 2-3

The State kept the claim in abeyance, citing Rule 23(1), which suspends benefits for family members charged with murdering the employee

p. 6

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the Appellant’s writ petition, upholding the constitutional validity of Rule 23(1)

02Issues

i.Whether Rule 23(1) of the Rules of 2019, which suspends "compassionate financial assistance" for family members charged with the murder of a government employee, also applies to claims for "compassionate appointment."