Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs State Of Haryana (Sawant, J.) on 4 May, 1994
In Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana, (1994) 4 SCC 138, while
emphasising that a compassionate appointment cannot be claimed as a matter
of course or in posts above Classes III and IV, this Court had observed
that: (SCC p. 140, para 2)
“2. …The whole object of granting compassionate employment is thus to
enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis. The object is not to give
a member of such family a post much less a post for post held by the
deceased. What is further, mere death of an employee in harness does not
entitle his family to such source of livelihood. The Government or the
public authority concerned has to examine the financial condition of the
family of the deceased, and it is only if it is satisfied, that but for the
provision of employment, the family will not be able to meet the crisis
that a job is to be offered to the eligible member of the family. The posts
in Classes III and IV are the lowest posts in non-manual and manual
categories and hence they alone can be offered on compassionate grounds,
the object being to relieve the family, of the financial destitution and to
help it get over the emergency. The provision of employment in such lowest
posts by making an exception to the rule is justifiable and valid since it
is not discriminatory. The favourable treatment given to such dependant of
the deceased employee in such posts has a rational nexus with the object
sought to be achieved viz. relief against destitution. No other posts are
expected or required to be given by the public authorities for the purpose.