Compassionate appointment cannot be claimed after lapse of substantial period: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Thursday held that a relative of a deceased employee cannot claim compassionate appointment after the lapse of a substantial time period (Steel Authority of India Limited versus Gouri Devi)..The Court was hearing an appeal against the orders by the Orissa High Court and the Central Administrative Tribunal, asking the Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) to reconsider the case of the respondent's second son for compassionate appointment, 18 years after the death of his father, the deceased employee.The application for compassionate appointment by first son had been rejected and disposed of in 1975.Observing that the issue at hand involved "a very narrow compass", the Bench of Justices MR Shah and Sanjiv Khanna noted that the Tribunal , whose order was upheld by the High Court, had "unfortunately" directed the appellant to reconsider the case and to appoint the second son on compassionate grounds despite the 18-year-delay and laches. It further noted that the order of the Division Bench of the High Court, which upheld the Tribunal's ruling had, not at all given any specific independent findings."...it can be seen that except narrating the submissions on behalf of the respective parties, there is no further discussion at all on merits and there is no discussion at all on delay and laches," the Supreme Court said.Citing the Supreme Court's decisions in Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and Ors. Vs. Nirval Singh and State of J&K and Ors. Vs. Sajad Ahmed Mir, the Court held that the respondent shall not be entitled to compassionate appointment as asked for. It thus ordered that the judgments and orders passed by the High Court and the Central Administrative Tribunal (Cuttack) be quashed and set aside.The respondent's husband, an employee of SAIL had died in the year 1977. The eldest son then approached public sector enterprise for compassionate appointment, which was considered as per the scheme then viz a circular dated September 1, 1975. His application was rejected. .After more than 18 years, the widow of the deceased filed a writ petition before the High Court with a prayer to appoint her second son on compassionate grounds, even as the earlier application being rejected was not challenged.The Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack, in its judgment and order dated November 28, 2019 directed the appellant (SAIL) to consider for compassionate appointment of the second son. SAIL's writ petition before the High Court appealing the same was dismissed by a Division Bench, being aggrieved by which it moved the top court. .[Read Judgment]