Date Sonu v. State of Hary f Haryana and others
Case Details
CWP-28158 158-2023 1 N THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA IN TH AT CHANDIGA NJAB AND HARYANA DIGARH 259 CWP CWP-28158-2023 , 2025 Date of Decision: October 29, 2025 Date Sonu ....Petitioner SUS VERSUS State of Hary f Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HA HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. Robin Dutt, Advocate for the for the petitioner. Mr. Arun Singla, AAG, Haryana aryana. Mr. Vishan Singh Chauhan, Adv UHBVNL. , Advocate for respondent- HARPREET REET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) 1. The present petition has been p 6/227 been preferred under Article 226/227 of the Const Constitution of India seeking issuan ure of issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for for quashing order dated 24.10.2 ed by 4.10.2023 (Annexure P-7) passed by respondent dent No.4 whereby it was state stated that n for the application for compassionat ssionate appointment is not in accorda dated ccordance with the instructions dated 019. 02.08.2019. 2. Learned counsel for the petitio her of petitioner contends that the father of the petitioner itioner was working with the responde d died dent-UHBVNL as CKD and died in harness on ess on 23.06.2017 at the age of 41 ye tioner 41 years. At that time, the petitioner was 17 yea 7 years and 6 months old. atta itioner attaining majority, the petitioner PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.10 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28158 158-2023 2 immediately iately applied for a job on compassion ither a assionate grounds, however, neither a job was gran granted nor any reply was provide of the rovided. During the pendency of the corresponden ondence, Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitr ryana li Vitran Nigam adopted the Haryana Civil Service ervices (Compassionate Financial Ass Rules, ial Assistance or Appointment) Rules, 2019 (Annex Annexure P-3) (hereinafter ‘Rules of .2019. les of 2019’) notified on 02.08.2019. The said Ru id Rules contain a saving clause ily of lause stipulating that the family of government e ment employees who died before the d Rules re the date of notification of the Rules but were not re not sanctioned compassionate financ petent financial assistance by the competent authority, ma , may exercise an option within a ciding thin a period of 06 months, deciding whether they r they want to avail benefits of ionate its of the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to nce to the Dependents of Deceased Rules, eased Government Employees Rules, 2006 (hereina hereinafter ‘Rules of 2006) or the Rul Rules he Rules of 2019. As such, the Rules of 2006 do no 6 do not act as a bar on compassionate ionate appointment. 3.
Legal Reasoning
It is settled law that compassion ession assionate appointment is a concession and not a rig t a right. Notably, a claim towards c nt can ards compassionate employment can only be made e made if the applicable Rules or instr e sole r instructions provide for it. The sole purpose behi e behind providing this concession is of the ion is to ensure that the family of the deceased or m ed or medically incapacitated employe upon ployee is not rendered destitute upon his sudden de den death or incapacitation. Furthermo y only thermore, such appointment may only be made in de in view of financial reasons w od as ons which must be understood as foreseeable p able poverty due to demise or incapa er and incapacitation of the breadwinner and not a mere ch ere change in standard in life. Since entry, Since it allows for a side-door entry, the Rules co les concerning compassionate appo preted appointment are to be interpreted PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.10 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28158 158-2023 5 strictly. As s . As such, demise/incapacitation in gh to n in itself would not be enough to ensure recrui recruitment and all parameters laid do ily be laid down therein must necessarily be satisfied. Rel d. Reliance in this regard can be place red by e placed on the judgment rendered by a three-Judge Judge bench of the Hon’ble Suprem te of upreme Court in Tinku vs. State of Haryana 202 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3292, whe ustice , wherein, speaking through Justice A.G. Masih, asih, the following as held: “11. The very idea of equality is a ality enshrined in Article 14 is a concept clothed in positivity bas d to y based on law. It can be invoked to enforce a claim having sanct can, anctity of law. No direction can, therefore, be issued mandating any ating the State to perpetuate any illegality or irregularity commi , an mmitted in favour of a person, an individual, or even a group of i y to of individuals which is contrary to the policy or instructions appli f an pplicable. Similarly, passing of an illegal order wrongfully confe on onferring some right or claim on someone does not entitle a simil re a imilar claim to be put forth before a court nor would court be bound ourt ound to accept such plea. The court will not compel the authority over ority to repeat that illegality over again. If such claims are ente ued, entertained and directions issued, that would not only be agains but inst the tenets of the justice but would negate its ethos resultin ality ulting in the law being a causality culminating in anarchy and la nnot nd lawlessness. The Court cannot ignore the law, nor can it overl ight overlook the same to confer a right or a claim that does not have le t be ve legal sanction. Equity cannot be extended, and that too negative t tage tive to confer a benefit or advantage without legal basis or justificatio ication. 12. As regards the compassiona ht to ionate appointment being sought to be claimed as a vested right fo say ht for appointment, suffice it to say that the said right is not a cond oyee condition of service of an employee PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.10 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28158 158-2023 6 who dies in harness, which m dent h must be given to the dependent without any kind of scrutiny s of tiny or undertaking a process of selection. It is an appointment and ent which is given on proper and strict scrutiny of the various pa h an s parameters as laid down with an intention to help a family out o cial ut of a sudden pecuniary financial destitution to help it get out of tion t of the emerging urgent situation where the sole bread earner hem arner has expired, leaving them helpless and maybe penniless. t is, ess. Compassionate appointment is, therefore, provided to bail o ased il out a family of the deceased employee facing extreme finan the inancial difficulty and but for the employment, the family will not This l not be able to meet the crisis. This shall in any case be subject the ject to the claimant fulfilling the requirements as laid down in th ules in the policy, instructions, or rules for such a compassionate appoin pointment. 13. It must be clearly stated her re is d here that in a case where there is no policy, instruction, or rule ent rule providing for an appointment on compassionate grounds, su t be s, such an appointment cannot be granted.” dded) (emphasis added) 8. Further still, Further, a two on’ble two-Judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Cou e Court in Canara Bank vs. Ajithku 32 , ithkumar G.K.2025 AIR SC 1232 , dealt with th ith the matter in extenso and speak ankar speaking through Justice Dipankar Datta, laid do laid down the following: “Judic udicial Precedents On The Issue of e of Compassionate Appointment xxx xxx xxx 11. D . Decisions of this Court on the t on the contours of appointment on compa mpassionate ground are legion an s to n and it would be apt for us to consid nsider certain well-settled princi lized inciples, which have crystallized PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.10 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28158 158-2023 7 throug rough precedents into a rule of law. l but law. They are (not in sequential but contex ntextual order): a) Appointment on compassiona d on sionate ground, which is offered on humanitarian grounds, is an exc ty in n exception to the rule of equality in the matter of public employmen tate ment [see General Manager, State Bank of India v. Anju Jain, (20 , (2008) 8 SCC 475]. b) Compassionate appointment ence ent cannot be made in the absence of rules or instructions [see Har d v. Haryana State Electricity Board v. Krishna Devi, (2002) 10 SCC 24 C 246]. c) Compassionate appointment two ment is ordinarily offered in two contingencies carved out as exc viz. exceptions to the general rule, viz. to meet the sudden crisis occ on occurring in a family either on account of death or of medical nner ical invalidation of the breadwinner while in service [see V. Sivamu 008) amurthy v. Union of India, (2008) 13 SCC 730]. d) The whole object of granting t by ting compassionate employment by an employer being intended to e of a to enable the family members of a deceased or an incapacitated em den ed employee to tide over the sudden financial crisis, appointments on ould ts on compassionate ground should be made immediately to re tress redeem the family in distress [see Sushma Gosain v. Union o ion of India, (1989) 4 SCC 468]. e) Since rules relating to compa it a ompassionate appointment permit a side-door entry, the same have tion ave to be given strict interpretation [see Uttaranchal Jal Sansthan SCC han v. Laxmi Devi, (2009) 11 SCC 453]. f) Compassionate appointment ight ent is a concession and not a right and the criteria laid down in th y all in the Rules must be satisfied by all aspirants [see SAIL v. Madhusu ]. husudan Das, (2008) 15 SCC 560]. PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.10 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28158 158-2023 8 g) None can claim compassio y of assionate appointment by way of inheritance [see State of Chattis gar, attisgarh v. Dhirjo Kumar Sengar, (2009) 13 SCC 600]. h) Appointment based solely our ely on descent is inimical to our constitutional scheme, and bein has being an exception, the scheme has to be strictly construed and co se it d confined only to the purpose it seeks to achieve [see Bhawani n of wani Prasad Sonkar v. Union of India, (2011) 4 SCC 209]. i) None can claim compas passionate appointment, on the the occurrence of death/medical in rned al incapacitation of the concerned employee (the sole bread earne re a arner of the family), as if it were a vested right, and any appoint the pointment without considering the financial condition of the fam ally family of the deceased is legally impermissible [see Union of In ) 20 f India v. Amrita Sinha, (2021) 20 SCC 695]. j) An application for compass be passionate appointment has to be made immediately upon death/i case ath/incapacitation and in any case within a reasonable period ther ould thereof or else a presumption could be drawn that the family o ated ly of the deceased/incapacitated employee is not in immediate ne uch te need of financial assistance. Such appointment not being a vested nnot sted right, the right to apply cannot be exercised at any time in fu ered in future and it cannot be offered whatever the lapse of time over me and after the crisis is over [see Eastern Coalfields Ltd. v. SCC . v. Anil Badyakar, (2009) 13 SCC 112]. k) The object of compassionat ve a onate employment is not to give a member of a family of the decea less eceased employee a post much less a post for post held by the dec nate deceased. Offering compassionate employment as a matter of cour cial course irrespective of the financial condition of the of family of king the deceased and making PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.10 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28158 158-2023 9 compassionate appointments in V is ts in posts above Class III and IV is legally impermissible [see Ume Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State o e of Haryana, (1994) 4 SCC 138]. l) Indigence of the dependents o the nts of the deceased employee is the first precondition to bring th e of g the case under the scheme of compassionate appointment. If t the . If the element of indigence and the need to provide immediate assi cial assistance for relief from financial destitution is taken away from t, it rom compassionate appointment, it would turn out to be a reservat ents rvation in favour of the dependents of the employee who died while ectly hile in service which would directly be in conflict with the ideal nder eal of equality guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constit v. B. nstitution [see Union of India v. B. Kishore, (2011) 13 SCC 131]. m) The idea of compassionate a e for te appointment is not to provide for endless compassion [see I.G. ani I.G. (Karmik) v. Prahalad Mani Tripathi, (2007) 6 SCC 162]. n) Satisfaction that the famil cing amily members have been facing financial distress and that an nate an appointment on compassionate ground may assist them to tide o ugh; ide over such distress is not enough; the dependent must fulfil the such the eligibility criteria for such appointment [see State of Guja ari, Gujarat v. Arvindkumar T. Tiwari, (2012) 9 SCC 545]. o) There cannot be reservation e as tion of a vacancy till such time as the applicant becomes a major less jor after a number of years, unless there are some specific provisio tate visions [see Sanjay Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2000) 7 SCC 192]. p) Grant of family pension or efits n or payment of terminal benefits cannot be treated as substitu ent stitute for providing employment assistance. Also, it is only in rar ided n rare cases and that too if provided by the scheme for compass not passionate appointment and not PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.10 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28158 158-2023 10 otherwise, that a dependent wh e of t who was a minor on the date of death/incapacitation, can be co pon e considered for appointment upon attaining majority [see Canara B ara Bank (supra)]. q) An appointment on compassi ears assionate ground made many years after the death/incapacitation o due on of the employee or without due consideration of the financia the ncial resources available to the dependent of the deceased/inca be /incapacitated employee would be directly in conflict with Article tion ticles 14 and 16 of the Constitution [see National Institute of Tech ngh, Technology v. Niraj Kumar Singh, (2007) 2 SCC 481]. r) Dependents if gainfully em ered employed cannot be considered [see Haryana Public Service C ngh, ce Commission v. Harinder Singh, (1998) 5 SCC 452]. s) The retiral benefits received ased eived by the heirs of the deceased employee are to be taken into c f the to consideration to determine if the family of the deceased is left in ilute ft in penury. The court cannot dilute the criterion of penury to o do". to one of "not very well-to-do". [see General Manager (D and 4) 7 and PB) v. Kunti Tiwary, (2004) 7 SCC 271]. t) Financial condition of the fa yee, e family of the deceased employee, allegedly in distress or penury, the ury, has to be evaluated or else the object of the scheme would stan such stand defeated inasmuch as in such an eventuality, any and every de ing- ry dependent of an employee dying in- harness would claim employ nt is ployment as if public employment is heritable [see Union of India 012) dia v. Shashank Goswami, (2012) 11 SCC 307, Union Bank of In 6) 7 f India v. M. T. Latheesh, (2006) 7 SCC 350, National Hydroelectr ank lectric Power Corporation v. Nank Chand, (2004) 12 SCC 487 k v. 487 and Punjab National Bank v. Ashwini Kumar Taneja, (2004) 004) 7 SCC 265]. PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.10 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28158 158-2023 11 u) The terminal benefits, inves ome nvestments, monthly family income including the family pension an ther n and income of family from other l sources, viz. agricultural land were rightly la taken into into consideration by the authority ly is rity to decide whether the family is living in penury. [see Somvir Sin r Singh (supra)]. v) The benefits received by wido nder widow of deceased employee under Family Benefit Scheme assuring tand ring monthly payment cannot stand in her way for compassionate nefit nate appointment. Family Benefit Scheme cannot be equated w nate d with benefits of compassionate appointment. [see Balbir Kaur v aur v. SAIL, (2000) 6 SCC 493] w) The fixation of an income sl hich e slab is, in fact, a measure which dilutes the element of arbitrar the itrariness. While, undoubtedly, the facts of each individual case hav king e have to be borne in mind in taking a decision, the fixation of an inc pose n income slab subserves the purpose of bringing objectivity and unifo sion uniformity in the process of decision making. [see State of H.P. v. S SCC . v. Shashi Kumar, (2019) 3 SCC 653]. x) Courts cannot confer bened etic enediction impelled by sympathetic consideration [see Life Insura a v. surance Corporation of India v. Asha Ramchandra Ambekar, (1 ar, (1994) 2 SCC 718]. y) Courts cannot allow compas the passionate appointment dehors the statutory regulations/instruction date ctions. Hardship of the candidate does not entitle him to appointment dehors to such such regulations/instructions [see SB SCC SBI v. Jaspal Kaur, (2007) 9 SCC 571]. z) An employer cannot be com ent compelled to make an appointment on compassionate ground contr riya ontrary to its policy [see Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan v. Dharm SCC harmendra Sharma, (2007) 8 SCC 148]. PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.10 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28158 158-2023 12 It would be of some releva l the elevance to mention here that all the decisions referred to above are two are by coordinate benches of two Judges.” 9. Lastly, the concession of comp ust be compassionate appointment must be provided as ed as early as possible to mitigate th o take gate the financial distress set to take effect with with the demise/incapacitation of e, the n of the employee. Therefore, the claimant oug nt ought to apply for the same within nara ithin a reasonable period. In Canara Bank(supra) pra), the following was observed in ed in this regard: “27. Lapse of time could, ho for , however, be a major factor for denying compassionate appoint ged ointment where the claim is lodged belatedly. A presumption is le s of is legitimately drawn in cases of claims lodged ly belatedly that the family of the the deceased/incapacitated employe d of ployee is not in immediate need of financial assistance. However, able ever, what would be a reasonable time would largely depend end on the policy/scheme for for compassionate appointment un time t under consideration. If any time limit has been prescribed for m the for making an application and the claimant applies within such p t be ch period, lapse of time cannot be assigned as a ground for rejectio jection.” (emphasis added) 10. In view of the discussion above idered above, this Court is of the considered opinion that n that the petitioner cannot claim co t as a im compassionate appointment as a matter of righ of right, especially when the Rules o it. In ules of 2006 do not provide for it. In any case, the se, the family of the deceased canno efit of cannot be allowed to take benefit of both financia nancial assistance as well as appointme nds. ointment on compassionate grounds. 11. Accordingly, the present petition etition is dismissed. PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.10 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28158 158-2023 13 12. Pending miscellaneous applicat stand pplication(s), if any, shall also stand
Arguments
Learned counsel further submits taken, ubmits that when no action was taken, the petitione titioner served a legal notice dated 4) dated 16.01.2021 (Annexure P-4) pursuant to w nt to which, the respondents raised for an aised an objection and asked for an affidavit to th it to the effect that the petitioner and h im for r and his siblings forego the claim for family pensi pension and arrears. The requisite a hed, a isite affidavit was also furnished, a copy of whi f which is available at Annexure P ck of xure P-5. Aggrieved by the lack of decision on p n on part of the respondents, the mo ved a he mother of the petitioner moved a representation ntation requesting for the case of the ed for of the petitioner to be considered for compassionat ssionate appointment. Without exam ndent examining the request, respondent No.4 passed assed impugned order dated 24.10.20 g that .2023 (Annexure P-7) stating that PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.10 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28158 158-2023 3 the applicatio plication of the petitioner for compa not in compassionate appointment is not in accordance w ance with the Rules of 2019. 4. Per contra learned counsel for bmits el for respondents No.2 to 5 submits that the mo e mother of the petitioner applied ancial pplied for compassionate financial assistance in nce in the year 2017, which was pro dated as provided vide office order dated 26.10.2017 i 017 in terms of Rules of 2006. ancial 006. While applying for financial assistance, th nce, the petitioner and his sister subm re R- submitted an affidavit (Annexure R 1), duly attes y attested by the Executive Magistrate mbers istrate, stating that as major members of the family family of the deceased, they forego ionary forego their claim to all pensionary benefits and s and the same be paid to their mot ionate ir mother only. Since compassionate assistance ha nce has already been provided to the m terms o the mother of the deceased in terms of Rules of es of 106, which does not contain ionate ontain provisions for compassionate appointment, tment, it cannot be said that the case ained e case of the petitioner has remained undecided. T ded. Therefore, the provisions of Rul ply to of Rules of 2019 would not apply to the case at ha e at hand. Lastly, the petitioner has ra ionate has raised a claim for compassionate appointment tment after about 04 years from the eased m the death of his father- deceased employee, an ee, and is therefore, also barred by del by delay and laches. 5. Having heard learned counsel fo rusing nsel for the parties and after perusing the record of ord of the case, it transpires that the ied on at the father of the petitioner died on 23.06.2017 w 017 while he was still in service. I ner is ice. It appears that the petitioner is seeking comp compassionate appointment in terms ver, at terms of Rules of 2019. However, at the time of d e of death of the father of the petitio ere in petitioner, the Rules of 2006 were in force, which which provide for financial assistance s, but stance on compassionate grounds, but PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.10 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28158 158-2023 4 not appointm pointment. The benefits of Rules of 2 by a es of 2019 can only be availed by a party who is ho is otherwise governed by the Rul mains e Rules of 2006 if his claim remains undecided by ded by the competent authority before of the before the date of notification of the former. 6. Admittedly, the mother of the eived f the petitioner has already received compassionat ssionate financial assistance since the d rness, e the death of her husband in harness, as also discer discernible from office order No. 389 ure P- o. 389 dated 26.10.2017 (Annexure P 2). As such, t such, the benefits of Rules of 2006 ha to the 006 have already been released to the mother of the of the petitioner. In this regard, as ma eased, , as major legal heirs of the deceased, the petitione titioner and his sister also furnished 1) nished an affidavit (Annexure R-1) attested by a by an Executive Magistrate whereb their hereby they have relinquished their claim to any o any pensionary benefits and stated th o their tated that the same be released to their only. mother only. 7.
Decision
ed of. disposed of. October 29 P.C 29, 2025 RAR) (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasone Whether Reportable. : easoned. : Yes/No Yes/No PUNEET CHAWLA 2025.11.10 17:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document