Summary
The Court upheld assessment of a widow’s compassionate-appointment claim using the family pension actually payable when her application was considered. A reduction scheduled after ten years did not require using the lower future pension to award merit points. Pension’s character as payment for past service did not prevent its inclusion where the governing scheme required assessment of family resources. With no palpable arbitrariness in the policy-based evaluation, the Tribunal and High Court had no basis to order reconsideration.
Issues
- Whether the current family pension could be considered in assessing comparative merit for compassionate appointment despite a scheduled future reduction.
- Whether the Tribunal and High Court properly interfered with the scheme-based assessment.
Held
- Compassionate appointment is designed to address an immediate financial crisis following an employee’s death in service and is not a vested right. Authorities may assess the family’s financial position, including family pension where the scheme so requires. Pension’s connection with past service does not exempt it from that assessment. (¶¶ 10, 12)
- The pension payable on the date of consideration was the relevant payment under this scheme. Its scheduled reduction after a decade did not justify substituting the prospective lower amount when assigning merit points. (¶ 11-12)
- The current family pension was payable under service rules and was not an ad hoc payment. The authorities applied the same criterion to applicants, and absent palpable arbitrariness there was no basis to interfere with their evaluation under the guidelines. (¶ 12-13)
Result
Union’s appeals allowed; High Court judgment set aside and the respondent’s original application before the Tribunal dismissed.