Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Somnath vs Comm. Of Police on 8 August, 2025
1
Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
OA No.1668/2021
Order Reserved on :14.07.2025
Order pronounced on:
Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)
Somnath
Age 28 year
Group C.
S/o Sh. Mahinder
R/o Vill. Kapro
Tehsil Kheri, Jhalab
P.S. Narnaund,
District Hissar
Haryana. ...Applicant
(By Advocate:Mr. Ajesh Luthra)
Versus
1. Commissioner of Police
Police Headquarter
M.S.O. Building, I.P. Estate
New Delhi.
2. Deputy Commissioner of Police
(Establishment)
Police Headquarters
M.S.O. Building,
I.P. Estate
New Delhi.
3. Deputy Commissioner of Police
(Operation & Communication)
Delhi-110 054. ...Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. S.N. Verma)
2
Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021
ORDER
By Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J):
The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following relief(s):-
"(a) Call for the records of the case.
(b) Quash and set aside the impugned order dated 19.12.2019 and 28.09.2020 placed at Annexure A/1 and A/2 respectively.
(c) Direct the respondents to further consider and appoint the applicant to the post of MTS and/or Constable (Exe.) in Delhi Police, on compassionate grounds.
(d) Accord all consequential benefits.
(e) Award costs of the proceedings."
2. The facts in brief are that the real brother of the applicant who was working as a Head Constable (AWO) since 03.07.2016 had expired on 31.10.2018 leaving behind family consisting of old aged father and mother (74 and 73 years respectively), younger brother i.e. the applicant, two married sisters and a minor cousin niece/an orphan, who is residing and dependent on the family. The family of the deceased has no other source of income.
The applicant applied for appointment on compassionate ground to the post of Constable and/or MTS. Upon completion of 3 Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021 all formalities a call letter was issued to him to appear for the physical examination. The case of the applicant is placed before the Police Establishment Board for consideration. Upon consideration, the Board has rejected the case of the applicant for compassionate appointment as being less deserving for MTS.
3. Counsel for the applicant submits that perusal of impugned order dated 19.12.2019 itself would reveal that Screening Committee in its meeting has considered 80 cases for appointment on compassionate grounds. Many cases have been rejected on account of not meeting eligibility criteria like age, height etc. The applicant has been rejected as being a less deserving without pointing out any shortcoming or how he is less deserving. He submits that the candidates have not been aware of the comparative assessment and, therefore, the applicant has reason to believe that respondents have rejected him arbitrarily.
4. The applicant has submitted an appeal before the Hon‟ble Lieutenant Governor against his rejection. However vide impugned order of 28.09.2020 he has been informed that the appeal has been rejected. No detailed order has been received by him.
5. The respondents have filed their counter affidavit on issuance of notice.
4Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021
6. The factual aspects are not disputed. Late HC (AWO/TPO) Rajesh, No. 439/Comn. (PIS No. 28150412) was enlisted in Delhi Police on 02.11.2015 as temporary Constable (Exe.) and further appointed as HC (AWO/TPO) on 05.07.2016. On 31.10.2018 he expired due to illness at the age of 27 years 11 months & 14 days. Sh. Mahender Singh F/o Late HC (AWO/TPO) Rajesh, No. 439/Comn. had submitted an application in the Office of DCP/Ops. & Comm. regarding appointment of his son Sh. Somnath for the post of MTS in Delhi Police on Compassionate Grounds. After completion of all due procedure into the matter, the case of Sh. Somnath Brother of Late HC (AWO/TPO) Rajesh, No. 439/Comn. for appointment on Compassionate Ground was received in PHQ vide memo No. 4791/P.Br. (DA-I)/Ops. & Communication dated 20.09.2019. The case was considered by the Screening Committee of Delhi Police in its meeting held on 23.10.2019 but could not be approved due to the reason „Less deserving' than the similarly placed other cases. Accordingly, Sh. Mahender Singh F/o Late HC (AWO/TPO) Rajesh, No. 439/Comm. R/o H.No. WZ-57, Main Bazar Wali Gali, Shadipur, Delhi was informed in this regard vide letter No.6555/P.Br.(DA-I) Ops. & Communication dated 31.12.2019.
7. Later on, Smt. Santosh Mother of Late HC (AWO/TPO) Rajesh, No. 439/Comn. had filed an appeal/representation dated 10.07.2020 against the decision of Screening Committee arrived 5 Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021 in its meeting held on 23.10.2019 before the Hon'ble L.G. Delhi for considering the name of her son Sh. Somnath for appointment on compassionate ground in Delhi Police but the same was also not acceded to by the Hon'ble Lt. Governor, Delhi. Smt. Santosh Mother of Late HC (AWO/TPO) Rajesh, No.439/Comn. has also been informed in this regard vide letter No.F.3/39/2020/HP- I/Estt. 1567-1568, dated 28.09.2020.
8. Respondents have also relied on the DOP&T instructions and Standing Order of 39/2018. They submit that the Screening Committee also keeps in mind financial condition of the deceased family and other relevant factors such as the presence of earning members, size of family, age of deceased at the time of death, age of the children and the essential needs of the family as well as instructions of the Government of India on the subject and the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India dated 04.05.1994 in the case of Shri Umesh Kumar Nagpal Vs. State of Haryana and others vide which it has been held that compassionate ground appointment is not a vested right. Hence the action taken by the respondents is legal and justified.
9. The respondents defended their action by stating that the case of the applicant was rejected on account of being less deserving in comparison. To support their claim they have 6 Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021 brought the Minutes of the Screening Committee where the case of the applicant had been considered for the post of MTS.
10. We note that five MTS posts have been filled on compassionate basis by the same Screening Committee. The merits of the persons, who were selected are more or less comparable to the merits of the applicant. We also could note that one Mr. Amit S/o Late Sh. Satbir Singh has been granted the appointment in lieu of his late father whereas the wife of the deceased had also applied earlier whose case was rejected at that point of time due to non-availability of vacancy. Owing to the hardships the compassionate appointment was considered favourably for the son.
11. Heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the entire record.
12. Compassionate appointment is a social security scheme launched by the Government to grant appointment to a dependent family member on compassionate basis when a Government servant dies while in service or retires on medical grounds. The objective of the scheme is to provide immediate financial assistance to the family, who is left in poverty and without any means to sustain their livelihood. The issue of compassionate appointment derives its origin from Article 16 (2) 7 Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021 of the Constitution of India. This type of matter was considered by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana & others v. Rani Devi & another, 1996 SCALE (5) 338, wherein it was observed that it need not be pointed out that claim of the person concerned for appointment on compassionate ground is based on the premise that he was dependent on the deceased employee. Strictly, this claim cannot be upheld on the touchstone of Article 14 or 16 of Constitution. However, such claim is considered as reasonable and permissible on the basis of sudden crisis occurring in the family of such employee, who has served the State and dies while in service. That is why it is necessary for the authorities to frame rules, regulations or to issue such administrative orders, which can stand the test of Articles 14 &
16. Thus, if an employee dies while in service, then, according to rule framed by the Central Government or State Government, to appoint one of the dependents, shall not be violative of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution because it is to mitigate the hardship due to the death of the bread earner of the family and sudden misery faced by the members of the family of such employee. While reiterating the purpose of making appointment on compassionate ground, the Apex Court in National Institute of Technology & others v. Niraj Kumar Singh, (2006) 2 SCC 481 emphasized that all public appointments must be in consonance 8 Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021 with Article 16 of the Constitution. Exceptions carved out, therefore, are the cases where appointments are to be given to the widow or the dependent children of the employee, who died in harness. Such an exception is carved out with a view to see that the family of the deceased employee, who has died in harness, does not become a destitute. The question often arises whether it is a legal right. The Apex Court has emphasized that the appointment on compassionate ground cannot be claimed as a matter of right. In Mumtaz Yunus Mulani v. State of Maharashtra (2008) 11 SCC 384, the Apex Court has adopted the principle that appointment on compassionate ground is not a source of recruitment, but a means to enable the family of the deceased to get over a sudden financial crisis. The financial position of the family would need to be evaluated on the basis of the provisions contained in the scheme.
13. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Director of Treasuries in Karnataka& another v. V. Somyashree, 2021 SCC Online SC 704 had occasion to consider the principle governing the grant of appointment on compassionate ground. After referring to its earlier decision in N.C. Santhosh v. State of Karnataka, (2020) 7 SCC 617, the Apex Court has summarised the principle governing the grant of appointment on compassionate ground as 9 Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021 under:-
"(i) that the compassionate appointment is an exception to the general rule;
(ii) that no aspirant has a right to compassionate appointment;
(iii) the appointment to any public post in the service of the State has to be made on the basis of the principle in accordance with Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India;
(iv) appointment on compassionate ground can be made only on fulfilling the norms laid down by the State‟s policy and/or satisfaction of the eligibility criteria as per the policy;
(v) the norms prevailing on the date of the consideration of the application should be the basis for consideration of claim for compassionate appointment."
14. Keeping the aforesaid in view, the relevant O.Ms. issued by the DoPT on the point of „compassionate appointment‟, have been perused.
Vide the O.M. dated 16.11.1951, the DoPT provided exemption from requirement of the educational qualifications in respect of widows of deceased Government servants, provided the duties of these posts can be performed by the widows satisfactorily without having the prescribed qualification of Middle School pass, specified in the Departmental Rules.
15. Vide the subsequent O.M. dated 12.03.1984, certain instructions, in case the death took place long ago, were issued by the DoPT. They read:
"4. Where the death took place long ago - It will no longer be necessary for Departments to refer to Department 10 Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021 of Personnel and Administrative Reforms cases of compassionate appointments of the wards of the Government servants merely because a long time, say 5 years, has elapsed since the death of the Government servant. The Ministries/Departments may consider such cases themselves on merit but while admitting claim of such applications, Ministries/ Departments may please keep in view the important fact that the concept of compassionate appointments is largely related to the need for immediate assistance to the family on the passing away of the Government servant in harness. When several years have passed after the death of a Government servant, it would appear prima facie that the family has been able to manage somehow all these years and had some means of subsistence. Ministries/Departments will no doubt deal with such requests with a great deal of circumspection in order to give due allocation to more deserving cases, if any. The decision in such cases of belated appointments may be taken after the Secretary has approved of the proposal."
16. Vide the O.M. dated 26.09.1995, the DoPT provided for determination of vacancies for compassionate appointment. It reads:
"The undersigned is directed to say that according to para of this Department‟s O.M. No.14014/6/86-Estt. (D) dated 30.6.1987 read with this Department O.M. No.12/5/90-CS.II dated 22.9.1992 the percentage of vacancies to be filled by compassionate appointment in a given year should be determined by deducting from 50% the percentage of vacancies actually utilised by appointment of SC, ST, Physically handicapped and Ex-servicemen. With the introduction of 27% reservation for OBCs the question of determination of vacancies for appointment on compassionate grounds has been considered by Govt. in depth. It has been decided that compassionate appointments can be made upto a maximum of 5% of vacancies falling under direct recruitment quota in any Group „C‟ back upto 5% of vacancies to be filled in direct recruitment through SSC or otherwise so as to fill such 11 Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021 vacancies by appointment on compassionate grounds. It has also been decided that a person selected for appointment on compassionate grounds should be adjusted in the recruitment roster against the appropriate category viz. SC/ST/OBC/General category depending upon the category to which he belongs. For example, if he belongs to SC he will be adjusted against the SC reservation point, if he is ST/OBC he will be adjusted against ST/OBC point and if he belongs to General category he will be adjusted against the vacancy point meant for General category and so on."
17. Vide the O.M. dated 09.10.1998, the DoPT issued the scheme for compassionate appointment under the Central Government. Paragraph (8) of it reads as under:-
"8. BELATED REQUESTS FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT
(a) Ministries/Departments can consider requests for compassionate appointment even where the death or retirement on medical grounds of a Government servant took place long back, say five years or so.
While considering such belated requests it should, however, be kept in view that the concept of compassionate appointment is largely related to the need for immediate assistance to the family of the Government servant in order to relieve it from economic distress. The very fact that the family has been able to manage somehow all these years should normally be taken as adequate proof that the family had some dependable means of subsistence. Therefore, examination of such cases would call for a great deal of circumspection. The decision to make appointment on compassionate grounds in such cases may, therefore, be taken only at the level of the Secretary of the Department/ Ministry concerned.
(b) Whether a request for compassionate appointment is belated or not may be decided with reference to the date of death or retirement on medical ground of a Government servant and not the age of the applicant at the time of consideration."
12Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021
18. Vide the DoPT O.M. dated 05.05.2003, the case of compassionate appointment could be considered for a maximum time of three years and if compassionate appointment is not offered during that period, the case will be finally closed. However, this O.M. came up for consideration before the Hon‟ble High Court of Allahabad in Hari Ram v. Food Corporation of India through its Executive Director, Noida & others, 2009 (2) LBESR 482 (AII). In the said case, the Hon‟ble High Court quashed the O.M. dated 05.05.2003 by declaring the same as irrational, arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution. Paragraphs (19) and (20) of the judgment read as under:-
"19. In my opinion the prescription of maximum period of three years after verification by the Prescribed Committee of the penurious condition of the dependents of the deceased is highly irrational and unreasonable. The compassionate appointment should not be kept in the realm of a chance and to become a gaming exercise subject to the availability of vacancies and the maximum number of years. It should be based on human and sympathetic consideration to the family of the deceased employee. Each case should be reviewed on its own merit and consideration should not be allowed to any number of years. If the family continues to be under financial distress, there should be no limit of maximum number of years for which an application may be considered.
20. The writ petition is allowed. The instructions contained in the Office Memorandum dated 5th May, 2003 of the Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension, Government of India fixing time limit of three years for offering compassionate 13 Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021 appointment is declared to be irrational, arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The order of the Executive Director, North Zone, Food Corporation of India dated 5-10-2007 is quashed. The respondents are directed to consider the petitioner‟s case for appointment afresh without considering the maximum limit of the number of years for which consideration may be made, taking into account the extreme poverty in which the family is living and also give special consideration for the disability of the petitioner in seeking employment to save his family. The respondents shall consider the matter afresh within a period of one month from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before them."
19. We note that in the present case, the case of the applicant has been considered only once. The applicant has already been physically tested/examined and is otherwise fit for appointment even as Constable. There is no reason why he was not considered at least for the post of Constable. He is willing to serve as Constable (Executive) and/or as MTS. The Standing Order 39/2018 governing the compassionate ground appointment in Delhi Police itself states the eligibility criteria for dependent family members of the deceased employee who dies in service. The applicant was younger brother and dependent family members fall in the definitions which is as under :-
"Dependent Family Member" means-
(i) Spouse: or
(ii) Son (including adopted son); or
(iii) Unmarried daughter (including adopted daughter);
or
(iv) Brother or un-married Sister in the case of unmarried Government servant, who was wholly dependent on the deceased employee.14 Item no.56 OA No.1668/2021
20. Even otherwise he had applied for both the posts whereas he has been considered only for MTS post and that too only once. DOP&T consolidated instructions on appointment read as under:-
"TIME LIMIT FOR CONSIDERING APPLICATIONS FOR COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT:
Prescribing time limit for considering applications for compassionate appointment has been reviewed vide this Department O.M. No.14014/3/2011-Estt.(D) dated 26.07.2012. Subject to availability of a vacancy and instructions on the subject issued by this Department and as amended from time to time, any application for compassionate appointment is to be considered without any time limit and decision taken on merit in each case."
21. In view of above, the impugned order is quashed and set aside. Matter is remanded to the respondents for re-consideration of the applicant‟s case for compassionate appointment for both posts of Constable (Executive) and MTS by the next Screening Committee.
(Dr. Sumeet Jerath) (Harvinder Kaur Oberoi) Member(A) Member (J) /uma/