LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT & ANR versus M. SELVANAYAGAM @ KUMARAVELU
Appointment on compassionate grounds must fulfill the scheme's object of providing immediate succor to the family of a deceased employee in financial distress. Applications made after a considerable lapse of time, especially when the family has survived the initial impact through pension and terminal benefits and did not apply earlier, do not qualify for such appointment. Allowing claims merely because the applicant is a dependent and not in urgent need conflicts with Articles 14 and 16 and is unsustainable.
- Parties
- Appellants: LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT & ANR.; Respondent: M. SELVANAYAGAM @ KUMARAVELU
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 05 April 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Disposition
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; impugned order of the Division Bench of Madras High Court set aside.
- Legal Topics
- Compassionate Appointment, Appointment on Compassionate Grounds, Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, Delay in Application, Financial Crisis as Eligibility Criterion
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT & ANR.
Appellants
M. SELVANAYAGAM @ KUMARAVELU
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Disposition
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether an application for compassionate appointment made 7½ years after the death of the employee, by a dependent who was a minor at the time of death but attained majority later, satisfies the object and requirements of the scheme for compassionate appointment
- 2 Whether failure of the deceased employee's wife to apply immediately for appointment indicates that family was not in immediate financial crisis
Ratio Decidendi
Appointment on compassionate grounds must fulfill the scheme's object of providing immediate succor to the family of a deceased employee in financial distress. Applications made after a considerable lapse of time, especially when the family has survived the initial impact through pension and terminal benefits and did not apply earlier, do not qualify for such appointment. Allowing claims merely because the applicant is a dependent and not in urgent need conflicts with Articles 14 and 16 and is unsustainable.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; impugned order of the Division Bench of Madras High Court set aside.
Orders
- Impugned order of the Division Bench of Madras High Court is unsustainable in law and set aside.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment