Can married daughters claim jobs on compassionate grounds? Chhattisgarh High Court says ‘no’ in bank case

Justice Parth Prateem Sahu dismissed the plea on the grounds that the 2023 scheme does not include “married daughters” as dependent family members.

Underscoring that the law on compassionate appointment is well settled, the order added that it is not a parallel source of public employment, nor is it a form of inherited service benefit that automatically passes to a family member upon the death of an employee.

Justice Sahu continued that it is a narrowly drawn exception to the ordinary rule of recruitment, justified only by the need to relieve a family from sudden financial distress caused by the death in harness of its breadwinner.

Case of compassionate appointment by ‘married daughters’

The two petitioners were daughters of bank employees, one was the branch manage and the other was an office assistant at the Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank, who died in harness, respectively in 2015 and 2016.

At the time of the employee’s death, the bank did not have a compassionate appointment scheme in place; instead, it provided ex gratia compensation, which was paid to the families.

The bank later adopted a compassionate appointment policy in 2019, which was amended in 2023 to apply retrospectively to deaths occurring within five years prior to the policy’s adoption.

After this amendment, the petitioners applied for employment, but the bank rejected their claims on the grounds that “married daughters” are not included in the policy’s definition of “dependent family members”.

Petitioner’s case

Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Ashtosh Mishra submitted that the status of a dependent family member of a deceased government employee is to be seen at the time of death of the government servant and not at the time of consideration of grant of compassionate appointment or based on subsequent changes like marriage, etc.

He further argued that at the time of the death of the father of the petitioners, they were unmarried and wholly dependent upon the father, the respondent bank ought not to have rejected the claim for the grant of compassionate appointment to the petitioners.

It is submitted that the marriage of a dependent daughter does not extinguish her right to claim dependent employment as the dependent daughter of a deceased on the date of his death, and unmarried at the time of making the application.

It is further submitted that the petitioner’s father had no male issue and had only daughters; therefore, the petitioner’s mother has to rely solely on her daughter.

State’s stand

Appearing for the bank, advocate N Naha Rao submitted that at the time when the petitioner’s father died in harness, there was no policy prevalent in the respondent Bank to provide appointment on compassionate ground and the dependents of the deceased employee were only entitled to an ex gratia compensation, which was paid to the petitioner’s mother (widow of the deceased employee).

He argued that, according to the 2023 policy, employment on compassionate grounds can be considered, provided that a dependent family member, i.e., spouse or wholly dependent son or daughter (including legally adopted son/daughter), was wholly dependent on the employee at the time of his death in harness. ‘Married daughters’ are not included within the definition of ‘dependent family members’.

‘No policy of compassionate appointment’

• In the case at hand, there was no policy/scheme of compassionate appointment on the date of death of the petitioner’s father, facilitating appointment on compassionate grounds.
• The question of the petitioner receiving an appointment on compassionate grounds on the death of her father in the year 2016 does not arise at all.
• A bare reading of the clauses of the policy makes it clear that a dependent family member means a spouse, wholly dependent son or daughter, including son or daughter legally adopted by the employee during his lifetime, or wholly dependent brother and sister in case of an unmarried employee.
• The Supreme Court has repeatedly insisted that such claims must be tested strictly on the terms of the governing scheme, and not on sympathy.
• The Ministry of Finance, via order dated August 7, 2014, approved the scheme for compassionate appointment in public sector banks and called upon the Indian Bankers’ Association to take appropriate action to circulate this scheme to all public sector banks for adoption of the same with the approval of their respective boards.

• The Central Government via letter dated September 14, 2023, advised the banks to consider eligible applicants for appointment on compassionate grounds in terms of that in case the death of an employee had occurred within five years preceding the adoption of the scheme, subject to the other conditions laid down in the said scheme.
• In the case of Bhawani Prasad Sonkar v Union of India, the Supreme Court has held that a compassionate appointment cannot be made in the absence of rules or regulations issued by the government or public authority.
• In the case of Tinku v State of Haryana and others, the apex court has held that in a case where there is no policy, instruction, or rule providing for an appointment on compassionate grounds, such an appointment cannot be granted.

Purpose of compassionate appointments

• At this stage, it would be apposite to recall the concept and the purpose of the grant of compassionate appointment.
• The very purpose of granting compassionate appointments is to enable the bereaved family to tide over the immediate financial constraints of the family of the deceased employee.
• In the case of Haryana State Electricity Board and Another V Hakim Singh, the Supreme Court dealt with the case of a widow of a deceased employee who had applied after a period of 18 years for appointing her son, who was four years old when his father died in harness, contending that she could make the application only when her son attained majority.
• One more aspect of the case is that the death of deceased employees in both petitions is of the year 2015 and 2016, respectively, and for a considerable period of time, respective family members of deceased employees have survived without any employment on compassionate grounds.
• Hence, a compassionate appointment in such circumstances would apparently frustrate the object and purpose of granting a compassionate appointment.