Legal Reference Library

The High Court of Rajasthan in Uco Bank & Ors. v. Devi Kishan Harijan held that appointment on compassionate grounds cannot be allowed if the period of crisis is over for the family of the deceased employee. “In view of the various pronouncements cited above, it is apparently clear that the philosophy behind giving compassionate appointment is just to help the family in harness to get over the immediate crisis by the loss of sole breadwinner. This category of appointment cannot be claimed as a right after lapse of the period when the crisis is over. More so, the financial status of the family is also to be looked into as per the scheme framed by the employer while giving compassionate appointment and such appointment cannot be conferred contrary to the para-meters of the scheme,” the Bench comprising Justice Sangeet Lodha and Justice Deepak Maheshwari observed. Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/compassionate-appointment-cannot-allowed-period-crisis-family-deceased-employee-...

No compassion can be shown to a person who has no will to work, the Delhi High Court has observed while upholding a termination order against a clerk of District Court who was accused of absenting herself from duty frequently. One Suman Taneja, who was working as Lower Division Clerk in the office of District Court had approached the Delhi High Court against the termination order passed against her. Perusing the records, the Court observed that the petitioner was not performing her duties with due diligence and she was found guilty of taking unauthorized leaves and she has failed to show that the leaves that were taken by her were sanctioned by the respondents. Thus, it is clear that the petitioner has decided at her own will when to take leave and when to report for duty, Justice Ved Prakash Vaish said. Even after issuance of repeated Memos, the petitioner neither report back to duty nor submitted anysatisfactory explanation for her absence, which shows that she was absolutely incorri...

High Court of Chhattisgarh has held that the exclusion of widowed daughter-in-law in compassionate appointment policy is constitutionally impermissible and to that extent void. Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal made this observation in Duliya Bai Yadav vs. State of Chhattisgarh. The High Court, in a petition filed by a widowed daughter in law of a deceased employee challenging the order rejecting her application seeking compassionate appointment, said that implied exclusion of daughter-in-law from the fray of consideration by the State Government without considering the fact as to whether the daughter-in-law is dependent or not is constitutionally impermissible. The Court observed “On marriage, wife becomes integral part of the husband’s marital room entitled to equal status of husband as a member of the family and, therefore, a woman on marriage becomes a member of her matrimonial family and she has rights and obligations in the family. A daughter-in-law is considered, traditionally, as Grih ...

A married daughter is eligible to get government job of her deceased's father on compassionate grounds, the Chhattisgarh High Court has observed. Justice Sanjay K Agrawal made the observation on Tuesday while hearing a petition filed by Sarojani Bhoi (28) who had challenged the state government on the ground that she was not given the job of her father who passed away in 2011. Article referred: http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-married-daughter-eligible-for-deceased-father-s-govt-job-on-compassionate-grounds-chhattisgarh-hc-2151213

A Punjab and Haryana high court bench has said that women should be given preference over men in compassionate appointments, when both are born of public servants dying in harness. The high court bench of justice Rajiv Narain Raina, while dismissing the plea of a Hoshiarpur youth, said able-bodied men should be left to fend for themselves in the country today in the war of attrition fought daily in the employment market and in court. “This special provision is meant to secure chastity of the weaker sex and that they are not driven to red-light areas, to put it bluntly,” justice Raina said. The petitioner had argued that he was denied the job on the wrong premise as the facts recorded in his case were wrong. He had three sisters while it was recorded while denying the job that he had two elder brothers and a sister. “It makes little difference as to the numerical strength of members of the family while dealing with a case of compassionate appointment. when we talk of rights of childr...