Compassionate Appointment Cannot Be Given By Management Of Institute Where Deceased Was Employed, Must Be Placed Before DIOS: Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court has held that an application for compassionate employment cannot be decided by the management of the institution where the deceased government employee worked. It was held that such application must be placed before District Inspector of Schools for decision.

Justice J.J. Munir referred to Regulations of the Uttar Pradesh High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and Other Employees) Act, 1971 to hold that

“The Regulations aforesaid envisage a complete scheme for compassionate appointment and the power to select a candidate on compassionate ground does not at all vest with the Management of the Institution, where the deceased employee was serving.”

Case Background

Petitioner's father died, serving as a peon in an institute under the State of Uttar Pradesh in 2023. He then applied for compassionate appointment to the post of a clerk and joined his duties on 11.03.2024.

However, when the Institute's Management asked that the petitioner's name be included on the Human Resource Portal of the DIOS (District Inspect of Schools) for the payment of salary, no action was taken. The DIOS and the Joint Director of Education, Aligarh Region wrote letters of communication to each other regarding the matter, and yet no progress was made in the process.

Aggrieved by inaction on part of the authorities, the petitioner approached the High Court.

High Court Verdict

Examining Regulations 104-107 of Chapter III of the Rules, the Court held that the power to appoint the candidate to a post under compassionate appointment did not vest with the Management of the Institute.

“The entire scheme of Regulations 104-107 of Chapter III of the Regulations framed under the Act of 1921 does not at all authorize the management of the institution, where the employee, who died in harness, was working, to recommend any compassionate appointment, much less make it and afterwards seek approval of the District Inspecter of Schools, as done in the present case”, held Justice Munir.

The Court relied on the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Anand Kumar Tripathi v. State of U.P. and Ors. to hold that in the present circumstances, the management of the institution should have reported the matter with all necessary details to the DIOS. This not being the case, it held that the letter of appointment issued to the petitioner was void.

Further, it was observed that when guidance was sought from the Joint Director, he did right by placing the matter before the DIOS to proceed in accordance with the regulations. However, it was found that the DIOS did not do the same. The Court observed that the correct process for appointment would involve placing the matter before the DIOS who would then process the claim by entering in a registry. Thereafter, a district level committee would examine the case for appointment.

“The Chairman of the Nagar Palika Parishad, who is the Manager of the Institution, certainly had no right to issue the letter of appointment dated 06.03.2024 to the petitioner and then send the papers to the DIOS for his approval. The letter of appointment issued to the petitioner is contrary to the scheme of the provisions of Regulations 104-107 of Chapter III of the Regulations framed under the Act of 1921.”

The Court held that while the petitioner was deserving of compassionate appointment, he could not be granted relief in the way he had prayed for it. It was directed that the petitioner's case be placed before the DIOS for adjudication in accordance with the regulations under the Act.

Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed.

Case Title: Satish Chandra v. State of U.P. and 4 Ors. [WRIT - A No. - 16406 of 2024]

Click Here To Read/Download Order