Summary
The Court rejected compassionate appointment for the dependent of a permanent work-charged employee because permanent status did not constitute regular service and the applicable policy provided only a monetary grant. Later provision for appointments was not retrospective. Exercising Article 142, the Court nevertheless increased the grant from one lakh to two lakh rupees and directed release of the existing deposit with its accrued interest.
Issues
- Whether permanent status and pension benefits made a work-charged employee regular for compassionate appointment.
- Whether subsequent policy changes entitled the dependent to appointment or an enhanced grant.
Provisions considered
- Article 142, Constitution of IndiaExercised to increase the compassionate grant in the pending litigation despite absence of entitlement to appointment. (¶¶ 27, 28, 29)
Held
- Compassionate appointment is governed by the applicable scheme and is not an inherent right. The scheme at the employee’s death governs unless a later policy expressly applies retrospectively. The applicable policy excluded dependents of work-charged employees from appointment and provided a monetary grant. (¶¶ 13, 14, 23, 24)
- Permanent status acquired in work-charged service did not itself confer regular status. Pension and other service benefits did not alter that distinction; the Court did not withdraw benefits already granted. (¶¶ 17, 18, 19, 20, 21)
- Similar erroneous orders, including an order against which special leave had been declined, did not create a right to perpetuate an impermissible benefit. (¶ 22)
- The 2016 extension of compassionate appointment did not retrospectively cover earlier cases. The 2017 clarification confined those pending cases to the enhanced monetary grant under the 2014 policy. (¶¶ 25, 26)
- Although the claim was pending in litigation rather than before the authority, complete justice warranted enhancing the grant to two lakh rupees. The existing one-lakh deposit was to be released with accrued interest and the additional one lakh paid within two months, failing which simple interest at twelve per cent per annum would run until payment. (¶¶ 27, 28, 29)
Result
Appeal allowed; entitlement to compassionate appointment rejected. Existing one-lakh fixed deposit to be released with accrued interest and an additional one lakh paid within two months, with twelve per cent simple annual interest on default until payment. Parties to bear their own costs.