Compassionate Employment Cannot Be Granted After A Lapse Of Reasonable Period

  • Post category:Daily Judgments
  • Reading time:4 mins read

Compassionate Employment Cannot Be Granted After A Lapse Of Reasonable Period

Case: Central Coalfields Limited vs. Parden Oraon

Coram: Justices L. Nageswara Rao and S. Ravindra Bhat

Case No: CA 897 of 2021

Court Observation: The whole object of granting compassionate appointment is to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis which arises due to the death of the sole breadwinner. The mere death of an employee in harness does not entitle his family to such source of livelihood. The authority concerned has to examine the financial condition of the family of the deceased, and it is only if it is satisfied that but for the provision of employment, the family will not be able to meet the crisis that the job is offered to the eligible member of the family .

It was further asseverated in the said judgment that compassionate employment cannot be granted after a lapse of reasonable period as the consideration of such employment is not a vested right which can be exercised at any time in the future. It was further held that the object of compassionate appointment is to enable the family to get over the financial crisis that it faces at the time of the death of sole breadwinner, compassionate appointment cannot be claimed or offered after a signficant lapse of time and after the crisis is over.

“Though the reasons given by the employer to deny the relief sought by the Respondent are not sustainable, we are convinced that the Respondent’s son cannot be given compassionate appointment at this point of time. The application for compassionate appointment of the son was filed by the Respondent in the year 2013 which is more than 10 years after the Respondent’s husband had gone missing. As the object of compassionate appointment is for providing immediate succour to the family of a deceased employee, the Respondent’s son is not entitled for compassionate appointment after the passage of a long period of time since his father has gone missing.”, the bench observed while allowing the appeal.

[doc id=4630]

Previous Posts

‘Right Not To Be Deported’ Is Ancillary To A Fundamental Right Available Only To Indian Citizens

High Court Under Article 226 And 227 Should Be Extremely Circumspect In Interfering With Orders Passed Under Arbitration Act

Nothing On Record To Even Remotely Suggest That The Act Was Consensual: Supreme Court Upholds Rape Conviction

Quality Of Reasons Matters The Most: Supreme Court Sets Aside Bail Granted To Accused In Dowry Death Case

Hindu Undivided Family – No Presumption That Business Run By Karta In Tenanted Premise Is Joint Family Asset Download Judgement