The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that the death of an employee during service does not automatically entitle their family to a compassionate appointment.
The Court stressed that the financial condition of the family must be carefully assessed, and appointments should only be granted if the family is unable to cope with the crisis without such support, and provided there is a relevant scheme or rule in place.
Justice Rajesh Sekhri made this decision while rejecting a request from two men who wanted jobs in the Jammu and Kashmir State Handloom Development Corporation after their fathers died while working there. Mohammad Ashraf Mir and Ishfaq Ahmad Bhat, whose fathers died in 2007 and 2002, asked for jobs on compassionate grounds. The Corporation had suggested their cases, but delays happened, and their requests were eventually turned down, leading them to go to court.
The petitioners argued that the Corporation had discriminated against them by approving compassionate appointments for others while denying their applications.
The Corporation, however, contended that the applications were submitted years late and that the petitioners’ financial situations had likely improved over time. It was emphasised that compassionate appointments are intended to provide immediate relief to families in financial crisis due to the death of the breadwinner, a criterion the petitioners no longer met.
The court, referencing multiple Supreme Court judgments, clarified that compassionate appointments are not a right but a means to address immediate financial hardship caused by the death of a government employee. The court noted that the government or concerned authority must examine the family’s financial condition to determine the necessity of immediate support through employment.
