Compassionate Appointment Policy Prevalent At The Time Of Employee's Death Applies, Not Subsequent One: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court reiterated that the policy prevalent at the time of death of the deceased employee is required to be considered for the appointment on compassionate ground.

"The claim for compassionate appointment must be decided only on the basis of relevant scheme prevalent on date of demise of the employee and subsequent scheme cannot be looked into.", the bench of Justices MR Shah and Sanjiv Khanna observed.

In this case, the deceased employee (who was working on the post of Chowkidar in the office of Assistant Engineer, Public Health Engineer, District Tikamgarh, Madhya Pradesh) died on 08.10.2015. At the time of death, he was working as a work charge employee. As per the policy/circular prevalent at the time of the death of the deceased employee, in case of death of the employee working on work charge, his dependents/heirs were not entitled to the appointment on compassionate ground and were entitled to Rs. 2 lakhs as compensatory amount. Subsequently, the policy came to be amended in 2016, under which even in the case of death of the work charge employee, his heirs/dependents will be entitled to the appointment on compassionate ground.

In writ petitions filed by some dependents/heirs, the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed the authority to consider their case for appointment on compassionate ground

Allowing the appeal filed against this judgment, the Apex Court bench observed that the scheme prevalent on the date of death of the deceased employee is only to be considered. Setting aside the High Court judgment, the court observed thus:

"As per the settled preposition of law laid down by this Court for appointment on compassionate ground, the policy prevalent at the time of death of the 4 deceased employee only is required to be considered and not the subsequent policy. 4.1 In the case of Indian Bank and Ors. Vs. Promila and Anr., (2020) 2 SCC 729, it is observed and held that claim for compassionate appointment must be decided only on the basis of relevant scheme prevalent on date of demise of the employee and subsequent scheme cannot be looked into. Similar view has been taken by this Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors. Vs. Amit Shrivas, (2020) 10 SCC 496. It is required to be noted that in the case of Amit Shrivas (supra) the very scheme applicable in the present case was under consideration and it was held that the scheme prevalent on the date of death of the deceased employee is only to be considered. In that view of the matter, the impugned judgment and order passed by the Division Bench is unsustainable and deserves to be quashed and set aside."

Click here to Read/Download Judgment