Live
- Two Russian oil tankers with 29 on board damaged due to bad weather
- Telangana's Traditions Will Be Protected, Village by Village : BRS Leader MLC K. Kavitha
- Uganda to relocate 5,000 households from landslide-prone areas in eastern region
- Harish Rao Criticizes CM Revanth Reddy: "His Time is Over"
- Vijay Sethupathi Hails 'Vidudala-2' as a Theatrical Game-Changer
- Sahaj Yog: A Path to Inner Transformation and Harmony City takes giant strides
- Allu Arjun meets his uncle Nagababu at his residence
- J&K L-G felicitates Langar organisations & NGOs for contribution during Amarnath Yatra
- Hit by Covid, MP's Rakesh Mishra sees revival of his fortunes, courtesy PM SVANidhi scheme
- Trailblazing Yakshagana Artiste Leelavathi Baipaditthaya No More
HC: Compassionate appointment not a right
The Allahabad High Court has held that benefit of compassionate appointment cannot be claimed as a \"matter of right\" and such a benefit would be \"illegal\" if given \"without determining the financial crises\" that family members of a deceased government employee may be facing.
Allahabad: The Allahabad High Court has held that benefit of compassionate appointment cannot be claimed as a "matter of right" and such a benefit would be "illegal" if given "without determining the financial crises" that family members of a deceased government employee may be facing.
A division bench comprising justices Rajesh Kumar and Shamsher Bahadur Singh also said that "lapses" on part of the UP government departments in determining financial crises and recording "specific findings in this regard" prior to making compassionate appointments had been "resulting in grave irregularity and illegality", besides "causing unnecessary litigation, burdening the court and causing unnecessary harassment to the party concerned.”
The court made the observations in an order dated May 8, wherein the State's Chief Secretary was directed to issue a circular to all departments "to abide by the law laid down in the present case". The court also directed that applications for compassionate appointment must be disposed of "within a maximum period of six months from the date of its presentation".
The order was passed while allowing a Special Appeal filed by the State government challenging a single judge order dated 26.07.2013. Vide the impugned judgment, the State government had been slapped with a cost of Rs 10,000 besides being asked to "re-consider the claim" of Raj Surya Pratap Singh Chauhan, whose father was a police constable and had died in harness on 31.7.2001 and who had sought compassionate appointment to the post of a sub-inspector.
The State government challenged the order contending that in 2002 Chauhan had moved an application seeking appointment to the post of a sub-inspector on compassionate ground following which he was called for a test in 2008 wherein he failed. Soon afterwards, he moved a fresh application seeking appointment as a constable followed by another plea that he be appointed as a sub-inspector.
Since under the Dying in Harness Rules applications are required to be moved within five years of the death of a government employee, Chauhan's applications were turned down. He moved the court, which directed the police department to refer the matter to the State government, which has the discretionary powers to relax the time limit in special cases
