Central Administrative Tribunal - Jammu
Abid Khursheed vs Health And Medical Education ... on 2 February, 2026
:: 1 :: O.A. No. 290/2025
-CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JAMMU BENCH, JAMMU (RESERVED)
Hearing through video conferencing
Original Application No. 290/2025
Reserved on:- 29.09.2025
Pronounced on: - 02.02.2026
HON'BLE MR. RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, MEMBER (J)
Abid Khursheed, Age 35years
S/o Late Khursheed Ahmed
R/o Mohalla Kahi, Bhaderwah, Tehsil Bhaderwah, District Doda
Pin. 182202.
...Applicant
(By Advocate: - Mr. Sudershan Sharma)
VERSUS
1. The Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir through its
Commissioner/Secretary, General Administration Department,
Civil Secretariat, Jammu/Srinagar Pincode: 180001
2. U.Tof Jammu and Kashmir Commissioner/Secretary to Govt.
Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV
:: 2 :: O.A. No. 290/2025
Forest Department, Civil Secretariat, Jammu/Srinagar
Pincode:180001.
3. U.T of Jammu and Kashmir Commissioner/Secretary to Govt.
Health and Medical Education Department,
Civil Secretariat, Jammu/Srinagar
Pincode: 180001.
...Respondents.
(By Advocate: - Mr. Sudesh Magotra, ld. AAG)
Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV
:: 3 :: O.A. No. 290/2025
ORDER
Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member
1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs: -
a) "Prayer seeking quashing of Government Order No. 387-JK (GAD) of 2024 dated 25.01.2024 passed by respondent no.1 to the extent of appointment of the applicant as Class-IV in the Health and Medical Education Department J&K under the provisions of SRO-43 of 1994 which is patently illegal, arbitrary, unjustified and also discriminatory, in the given facts and circumstances of the case.
b) Further prayer seeking directions upon the respondent to reconsider the case of the applicant for his compassionate appointment against the post commensurate to his educational qualification on the same analogy as has been adopted in the cases of the similarly situated candidates. Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 4 :: O.A. No. 290/2025
c) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit may also be granted in favour of the applicant."
2. The facts of the case as averred by the applicant in his pleadings, are as follows: -
a) The applicant, namely Abid Khursheed, is a permanent resident of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and claims to be entitled to consideration for compassionate appointment under the provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Compassionate Appointment Rules, 1994, issued vide SRO-43 of 1994, as amended from time to time. The applicant asserts that upon the death of his father, Late Khursheed Ahmed, who was serving as a Forester in the Forest Department, the family was left in financial distress, thereby entitling the applicant to compassionate consideration.
b) At the time of the death of the deceased employee, the applicant possessed the qualification of 10+2, and subsequently acquired graduation, which according to him made him eligible for appointment against posts higher than Class-IV, particularly in Digitally signed by HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 5 :: O.A. No. 290/2025 the Forest Department. Accordingly, the applicant submitted an application dated 01.10.2020 seeking compassionate appointment under SRO-43 of 1994. His case was processed at the departmental level, beginning with the Divisional Forest Officer, Bhaderwah, who forwarded the proposal to the Conservator of Forests, Chenab Circle, Doda, and thereafter to the Chief Conservator of Forests, Jammu.
c) During the processing of the case, it was communicated by the Personnel Officer in the office of the Chief Conservator of Forests that while the applicant was otherwise eligible for compassionate appointment, no Class-IV vacancy was available in the Forest Department at the relevant time, and therefore, the matter was required to be taken up with the General Administration Department for consideration of his appointment in some other department.
d) The applicant contends that despite possessing superior educational qualification and despite the fact that similarly situated dependents such as Babli Devi and Manjit Kumar, Digitally signed by HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 6 :: O.A. No. 290/2025 who were dependents of deceased Chowkidars and possessed lower qualifications, were appointed as Forest Guards, his case was not accorded similar treatment. According to the applicant, in view of the amendment made to the J&K Forest (Subordinate) Service Recruitment Rules and SRO-177 of 2014, he was eligible at least for the post of Forest Guard, if not Forester.
e) Aggrieved by inaction and delay, the applicant earlier approached this Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 548/2022, which came to be disposed of on 31.05.2022, directing the respondents to consider the applicant's claim as a representation, strictly in accordance with the Compassionate Appointment Rules, taking into account his educational qualification and availability of posts, and to pass a reasoned order within a stipulated timeframe.
f) When the aforesaid directions were not complied with, the applicant initiated contempt proceedings. During the pendency of the contempt petition, the respondents issued Government Digitally signed by HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 7 :: O.A. No. 290/2025 Order No. 387-JK(GAD) of 2024 dated 25.01.2024, whereby the applicant was appointed as Class-IV/MTS in the Health and Medical Education Department, District Cadre Doda.
g) The applicant joined the said post due to compelling financial circumstances but has challenged the said order to the extent it appoints him as Class-IV, contending that the same is arbitrary, discriminatory, violative of the Tribunal's earlier directions, and contrary to the treatment accorded to similarly situated candidates. He further asserts that information obtained under the RTI Act revealed availability of vacancies of Forest Guards in the concerned division, thereby negating the plea of non-
availability of posts.
h) On these premises, the applicant seeks quashing of the impugned Government Order to the extent indicated and a direction to reconsider his claim for compassionate appointment against a post commensurate with his qualification.
3. The respondents have filed their written statement wherein they have averred as follows: -
Digitally signed by
HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 8 :: O.A. No. 290/2025
a) The respondents have filed their objections opposing the Original Application and have raised both preliminary and substantive defences. At the outset, it is contended that the applicant has failed to demonstrate infringement of any fundamental or statutory right and, therefore, the application is misconceived, devoid of merit, and liable to be dismissed in limine.
b) On facts, the respondents submit that the compassionate appointment case of the applicant was duly processed in accordance with the applicable rules. It is stated that the Forest Department, after examining the availability of posts, clearly conveyed that no Class-IV vacancy was available in the department at the relevant time and, therefore, the case was rightly forwarded to the General Administration Department for consideration of appointment in some other department, as permissible under SRO-43 of 1994.
c) It is further submitted that upon due examination, the High Level Committee (HLG) approved the applicant's appointment Digitally signed by HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 9 :: O.A. No. 290/2025 against a Class-IV/MTS post in the Pay Level SL-1 (₹14,800-
47,100) in the Health and Medical Education Department, District Cadre Doda, in terms of Rule 4(1) of SRO-43 of 1994, and accordingly, Government Order No. 387-JK(GAD) of 2024 dated 25.01.2024 was issued. The respondents assert that the appointment was made strictly in consonance with the rules governing compassionate appointments and that no relaxation or deviation was required or granted in the applicant's case.
d) The respondents have specifically contended that the object of compassionate appointment is not to provide employment commensurate with educational qualification or to ensure career advancement, but rather to provide immediate financial relief to the family of a deceased employee to tide over sudden hardship. In support of their stand, reliance has been placed on authoritative pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, including Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana and State of Rajasthan v. Umrao Singh, wherein it has been consistently held that compassionate appointment is Digitally signed by HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 10 :: O.A. No. 290/2025 not a vested right, nor can it be claimed as a matter of course or as an alternative mode of regular recruitment.
e) It is further pleaded that once an applicant accepts the appointment offered under the compassionate scheme, he cannot subsequently seek appointment to a higher post on the basis of higher qualification or parity with other cases. If the applicant aspires for appointment to a higher post, the only permissible course available to him is to participate in open competitive recruitment through the prescribed selection agencies such as JKSSB or JKPSC.
f) The respondents deny any allegation of discrimination and submit that each compassionate appointment case depends upon its own factual matrix, availability of posts, and administrative exigencies. The appointments referred to by the applicant pertain to different periods and cannot be treated as binding precedents to claim parity.
g) In view of the above submissions, the respondents maintain that the impugned Government Order is legal, valid, and in strict Digitally signed by HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 11 :: O.A. No. 290/2025 conformity with the rules governing compassionate appointments, and that the Original Application is an attempt to convert a welfare measure into a means of securing higher employment, which is impermissible in law. The respondents, therefore, pray for dismissal of the Original Application with costs.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings made by them.
5. The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, calling in question Government Order No. 387-JK(GAD) of 2024 dated 25.01.2024, whereby he has been appointed as Class-IV/MTS in the Health and Medical Education Department under the Jammu and Kashmir Compassionate Appointment Rules, 1994, despite possessing a Bachelor's degree and despite availability of higher posts, particularly in the Forest Department from which his deceased father retired. Digitally signed by HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 12 :: O.A. No. 290/2025
6. The undisputed facts reveal that the applicant's father, Late Khursheed Ahmed, was serving as a Forester in the Forest Department and died in harness, leaving behind the applicant and other dependents in financial distress. The applicant, within the prescribed time, applied for compassionate appointment under SRO- 43 of 1994. His case was processed at all departmental levels and was found eligible. The only reason cited by the Forest Department for not appointing him within the department was alleged non-availability of posts at the relevant time, resulting in forwarding of his case to the General Administration Department for consideration in some other department.
7. It is an admitted position that during the pendency of earlier proceedings before this Tribunal, including O.A. No. 548/2022, the respondents were directed to consider the applicant's case in accordance with the Compassionate Appointment Rules, keeping in view his educational qualification and availability of vacant posts, and to pass a reasoned order. However, instead of undertaking a meaningful and objective consideration, the respondents issued the Digitally signed by HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 13 :: O.A. No. 290/2025 impugned order appointing the applicant as MTS, without any discussion of his qualification, comparative cases, or vacancy position, thereby reducing the Tribunal's earlier direction to a mere formality.
8. What weighs heavily with this Tribunal is the RTI information dated 13.04.2022, placed on record by the applicant, which categorically establishes that 49 posts of Forest Guard were lying vacant in the Forest Division concerned. This document completely demolishes the respondents' plea of non-availability of posts and exposes the arbitrariness in the decision-making process. Forest Guard is a District Cadre post, and no material has been placed on record to show that these vacancies were earmarked for any other mode of recruitment or were under any legal embargo. In the presence of such large-scale vacancy position, denial of consideration to the applicant for a higher post is not only unjustified but patently discriminatory.
9. The applicant possesses a Bachelor's degree, which is far superior to the minimum qualification prescribed for the post of Forest Guard. The record further reveals that similarly situated dependents such as Digitally signed by HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 14 :: O.A. No. 290/2025 Babli Devi and Manjit Kumar, who were dependents of deceased Chowkidars and possessed lower educational qualifications, were appointed as Forest Guards. The respondents have failed to demonstrate any intelligible differentia or rational basis for adopting a different yardstick in the case of the present applicant. Discrimination of this nature strikes at the very root of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and cannot be sustained.
10. The respondents' contention that compassionate appointment is only meant to provide immediate relief and not career progression, though legally sound in abstract, cannot be applied mechanically or selectively. Compassionate appointment does not mean forced under- employment. While it is true that compassionate appointment is not a vested right to a particular post, it is equally settled that once the rules permit appointment against available posts and the candidate is qualified, the authorities cannot arbitrarily confine him to the lowest rung, particularly when higher posts are vacant and have been filled in similar cases.
Digitally signed by HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 15 :: O.A. No. 290/2025
11. This Tribunal is also unable to accept the argument that acceptance of the MTS post disentitles the applicant from seeking appropriate relief. The record shows that the applicant accepted the appointment under compelling financial circumstances and during the pendency of contempt proceedings. Such acceptance cannot operate as waiver of constitutional rights nor can it legitimise an otherwise illegal and discriminatory administrative action.
12. The impugned order also fails the test of reasoned decision-making, as it does not reflect any consideration of the applicant's educational qualification, vacancy position, comparative parity, or the earlier directions issued by this Tribunal. The action of the respondents, therefore, suffers from arbitrariness, non-application of mind, and colourable exercise of power.
13. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the appointment of the applicant as MTS/Class-IV, despite availability of 49 vacant posts of Forest Guard, despite his superior qualification of B.A., and despite appointment of lesser- Digitally signed by HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 16 :: O.A. No. 290/2025 qualified similarly situated candidates to higher posts, is illegal, discriminatory, and unsustainable in law.
14. Accordingly, the Original Application is allowed, and the following directions are issued:
a) Government Order No. 387-JK(GAD) of 2024 dated 25.01.2024 is quashed to the extent it appoints the applicant as Class-IV/MTS.
b) The respondents are directed to appoint the applicant to the post of Forest Guard, or any equivalent higher post commensurate with his qualification, against the available vacant posts in the Forest Department, strictly under the Compassionate Appointment Rules.
c) The applicant shall be granted notional seniority from the date he was appointed as MTS, with actual monetary benefits payable from the date he assumes charge of the higher post.]
d) The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Digitally signed by HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV :: 17 :: O.A. No. 290/2025
15. The appointment shall not be treated as a fresh appointment but as a continuation of compassionate appointment, so that no prejudice is caused to the applicant.
16. No order as to costs.
(RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA) Judicial Member /harshit / Digitally signed by HARSHIT YADAVHARSHIT YADAV