Does Compassionate Allowance Have All Attributes Of Pension? Kerala High Court Answers

V. Kesavan Nair approached the court challenging the judgment of a Single Bench of this Court holding that the appellant was not entitled to compassionate allowance from the date of dismissal from service.

As per the petition, on 18-02-1986, while working as Constable at CISF, the appellant was dismissed from service. This Court directed the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the appellant requesting for compassionate allowance.

The competent authority thereafter passed an order granting him compassionate allowance under Rule 41 of CCS (Pension) Rules with effect from 16-11-2016. The appellant challenged this order contendeing that he should have been granted compassionate allowance with effect from the date of his dismissal from service, and not prospectively.

The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, holding that the "relevant Rule does not provide that compassionate allowance be given with effect from a particular date as it was entirely within the discretion of the competent authority sanctioning the allowance."

Adv T. C. Govinda Swamy while appearing for the appellant argued that as per Rule 83, pension becomes payable from the date on which a Government servant ceases to be borne on the establishment. This entitles the appellant to compassionate allowance from the date on which he was dismissed from service. He also submitted that 'compassionate allowance' is to be treated as a class of pension having all attributes of pension.

Justice Alexander Thomas and Justice K. Babu found no merits in the arguments advanced by the appellant, observing that a reading of Rule 41 shows that the authority has absolute discretion in granting compassionate allowance.

The authority competent to remove a government servant from service has the discretion in the grant of compassionate allowance if the case is deserving of special consideration. In this case, the appellant seems to have unimpressive antecedents of being a habitual offender and misconduct.

Rule 39 also uses the expression 'may be granted' in case of a government servant selected for discharge owing to the abolition of his permanent post.

On the other hand, Rules 35-38 provide that the payment is mandatory and mandates that the payments be made from the date when the employee ceases to be in service. This also implies that compassionate allowance does not have all the characteristics and attributes of the pensions covered by Rules 35 to 40 of the Pension Rules, and it cannot be treated as a payment in lieu of the aforesaid pensions.

After scrutiny of all material presented before the Bench, the Court could not be convinced that "compassionate allowance should be granted to a government employee from the date of imposition of the punishment as a matter of right."

V. Kesavan Nair v. Union of India