Published On: Fri, Nov 2nd, 2018

Compassionate appointment not a matter of right but of employer discretion, says CAT

New Delhi: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has said compassionate appointments cannot be claimed as a matter of right since granting it would be the discretion of the employer by evaluating applicant’s family circumstances.

It is a settled law that appointment on compassionate ground cannot be claimed as a legal right.

The observation by the tribunal came while dismissing Delhi resident Rohit Choudhary’s application for compassionate appointment in the Delhi Development Authority.

“Grant of compassionate appointment is the discretion of the employer by using it in a judicious manner while evaluating the circumstances of the applicant’s family,” said a bench of administrative member Praveen Mahajan.

“It is a settled law that appointment on compassionate ground cannot be claimed as a legal right and financial stress has to be computed in relative terms,” he said.

The tribunal also said Choudhary, who was well qualified and held an engineering diploma, could not claim compassionate appointment as a matter of right.

Choudhary’s father had died at the age of 51 years leaving behind his wife, two sons and a daughter. Choudhary after getting a diploma in civil engineering had applied for compassionate appointment to any post in the DDA.

“The circumstances of the family have changed for the better since time of their father’s death, hence, the request of the applicant does not warrant interference,” the CAT said.

The tribunal noted that of the three children, Choudhary’s sister was married and his brother already has a job.

The counsel for the DDA had contended that compassionate appointment was not a backdoor mode of appointment and the whole object of granting it was to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis and to relieve it from financial stress to get over the emergency.

However, Choudhary’s case fell outside the prescribed parameters since one member of the family was already earning and there was reportedly no other liability, the counsel contended.


About the Author