GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (SERVICES.A) DEPARTMENT
Circular Memo. No. 46742/Ser.A 98-1 Dated: 11.08.1998.
Sub: Compassionate appointments to the dependents of deceased Government employees who die in harness - certain orders of Supreme Court of India - Communicated - Reg.
@@@@@
The following salient features of the orders of Supreme Court of India in certain cases of compassionate appointments to the dependents of Government employees who die in harness are communicated herewith for information and further necessary action:
"The Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 12889 of 1996 arising out of S.L.P(C) No. 11791 of 1996 in a case of compassionate appointment, while setting aside the orders of Andhra Pradesh High Court dated 26.4.1996 in W.A. No. 103, of 1996 and dated 21.07.1995 in W.P.No. 12896 of 1991., has observed that when there is no vacancy available, candidate cannot insist that he should be appointed on compassionate ground. The details of the case are as follows. In this case. viz, Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. (Appellant) Vs, Smt, A. Radhika Thirumalai (Respondent), the appellant had made rules for employment on compassionate grounds, subject to availability of vacancies in the respective staffing cadre/authorisation consequent on the death of her husband, the respondent applied for compassionate appointment, which was put on the wait list by the Appellant among the list of candidates who applied earlier for employment on compassionate grounds. Further in view of ban imposed on recruitment in their unit by the Appellant, compassionate appointment could not be provided to the Respondent. The Respondent filed a W.P. No. 12896 of 1991 in Andhra Pradesh High Court praying for a writ of mandamus directing the appellant to provide suitable permanent employment to the Respondent by creating a supernumerary post. The learned single Judge of High Court by Judgement dated 21.06.1995 issued a writ of mandamus directing the appellant to consider the candidature of the respondent on compassionate grounds to any suitable post and if found suitable, to appoint her to such post within a period of two months, duly rejecting the plea of appellant that since there was a ban on recruitment the appointment could not be given on compassionate grounds. Even the Division Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court, while dismissing the WI.A. filed by the Appellant held that appointment on compassionate ground is given notwithstanding whether there is any vacancy not by creating supernumerary post. Aggrieved by the said Judgement of Division Bench of the High Court, the appellant has filed appeal before Supreme Court. The Supreme Court of India, while dismissing the case in detail, among other things observed that in the appellant company, appointment on compassionate grounds is governed by Rules. Though in their rules a provision is made for compassionate appointment, another rule laid down that such appointment would be made depending upon the availability of vacancies in the respective staff cadre/authorisation. In other words, an appointment on compassionate grounds can be made only if a vacancy is available. In the course ·of argument, the supreme Court observed that an appointment on compassionate ground has to be given in accordance with the relevant rules and guidelines that have been framed by the concerned authority and so person can claim appointment on compassionate ground in disregard of such rule or guidelines. For the above reason and also the other reason discussed in the case, the Supreme Court set aside the Judgement of. Andhra Pradesh High Court dated 26.4.96 in WA No. 103 of 1996 as well as judgement of learned single judge dated 21.7.95 in W.P. No. 17896 of 1991 duly dismissing the W.P. filed by the respondents.
Further in the cases of Umesh Kumar Nagpal (1994 AIR SCW 2305) the Supreme Court has pointed out that appointment in public services on compassionate ground has been carved out as an exception, in the interests of justice, to the general rule that appointment in the public services should be made strictly on the basis of open invitation of applications and merit and no other mode of appointment nor any other consideration is permissible. A compassionate appointment is made out of pure humanitarian consideration taking into consideration the fact that unless some source of livelihood is provided, the family would not be able to make both ends meet and the whole object of granting such appointment is to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis. This Court has also laid down that an appointment on compassionate ground has to be given in accordance with the relevant rules and guidelines that have been framed by the concerned authority and no person can claim appointment on compassionate grounds in disregard of such rule or such guideline (Sec. Life Insurance Corporation Vs. Asha Ramachandra Ambekar, (1994 AIR SCW 1947), (Supra).
Further in Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation Vs. Dinesh Kumar (1996 AIR SCW 2727), the Supreme Court of India, among other things, has observed that normally even if the Tribunal finds that a person is qualified to be appointed to a post under kith & kin policy, the Tribunal should only give direction to the appropriate authority to consider the case of the applicant, in the light of relevant rules. It is not open to Tribunal to direct the appointment of any person to a post and also direct to create supernumerary post. The supreme Court in this case observed that the Tribunal should only give a direction to the appropriate authority to consider the case of the particular application, in the light of the relevant rules and subject to availability of post and accordingly set-aside the orders of the Administrative Tribunal of Himachal Pradesh dated 27.3.95 ordering conditional appointment to acquire the Typewriting qualification within one year as well as the order of Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal dated 06.03.1995 for creation of supernumerary post to accommodate the candidates when there is no such provision in the rules".
In all these cases, as seen from the judgements pronounced by supreme Court in the cases of compassionate appointments, it is observed that the Tribunals or High Court cannot direct the appropriate authorities the appointment of any person to a post or direct for creation of supernumerary posts when there are no vacancies available and in the absence of orders for creation of supernumerary in the rules governing compassionate appointments. The Supreme Court of India has laid down that an appointment on compassionate ground has to be given in accordance with relevant rules and guidelines that have been framed by the concerned authority.
All the departments of Secretariat, all Heads of Departments all the District Collectors and all the Government Pleaders at Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal and High Court of Andhra Pradesh arc requested to keep in view the above orders of Supreme Court while dealing with the court cases relating to compassionate appointments.
N.V.H. SASTRY
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (SERVICES).
