Plea on compassionate appointment dismissed

Justice S Vaidyanathan before whom the plea moved by one K Selvakumar seeking for a direction to the District Collector, Villupuram District, to appoint him under compassionate appointment, dismissed it based on an Apex court ruling, which held that compassionate employment must be considered strictly in accordance with the governing scheme and no discretion is left with any authority to make compassionate appointment dehors the scheme.

The petitioner had submitted that his father, a Village Assistant at Periababusamudram Village, Villupuram Taluk died on September 24, 1995, while he was in service. Following this, he had submitted a representation on December 31, 2015 followed by a reminder on February 24, 2016 and September 09, 2017. But since there was no response, he moved the court.

The Special Government Pleader (SGP) appearing for the District Administration submitted that Selvakumar’s father died in 1995 while he moved the first application in 2015. But as per the rules in vogue, the plea seeking appointment has not been submitted within three years from the date of Selvaraj attaining majority, as he is aged about 36 years as on the date of filing the present petition.

The petitioner’s mother is said to have made an application in the year 1995. But no proof has been adduced in support thereof, the SGP noted. He also pointed out that as per the Apex Court’s direction an appointment on compassionate ground is to meet the crisis occurring in the family on account of the death of the bread-winner while in service and the compassionate employment cannot be granted as a matter of right by way of largesse.

Based on this, Justice Vaidyanathan held “A reading of the averments in the affidavit would unfold the fact that based on his mother’s representation, she was granted the Family Welfare Fund and other monetary benefits and therefore, it is vividly clear that the representation was for the grant of benefits and not for the compassionate appointment.”