Compassionate appointment can’t be used for career growth: Why court denied relief to Uttarakhand man

Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari noted that the petitioner was given a compassionate appointment as a junior assistant in the district rural development agency on September 9, 2009.

The high court was hearing a plea filed by a junior assistant, who had been appointed on compassionate grounds in 2009, challenging the state government’s decision rejecting his claim for appointment as a junior engineer. 

Acquired diploma while in service

It was placed on record that the petitioner was given a compassionate appointment as a junior assistant in the district rural development agency on September 9, 2009, as his father, who served as a junior engineer, died while in service on May 12, 2006.  At the time of his appointment, the petitioner allegedly possessed intermediate qualifications only. 

Subsequently, the petitioner upgraded his educational qualification and acquired a diploma in civil engineering, while in service, and he then staked a claim for appointment as a junior engineer based on his academic qualification. However, his claim was turned down by the state government, by an order dated November 2, 2023. 

It was added that the state government’s November 2023 order held that the dependent of a late employee can claim compassionate appointment only once, and after availing that right in 2009 by joining the post of junior assistant, the petitioner cannot claim reappointment to the post of junior engineer, based on his upgraded qualification. 

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed this plea before the Uttarakhand High Court. Advocate Amar Murti Shukla was representing the petitioner, while the state was represented by advocate R C Joshi. 

‘No infirmity in state’s order’

• The court clarified that if the petitioner is eligible for promotion to the next higher post in the ministerial cadre, then his claim, with other similarly situated persons, should be considered by the competent authority, as per law. 
• The court found no infirmity in the view taken by the state government in its November 2, 2023, order rejecting the petitioner’s plea. 
• The high court noted that the petitioner accepted appointment as a junior assistant in 2009 without raising any demur.
• It held that, therefore, his claim for reappointment on a higher post as a junior engineer was legally not tenable. 
• The court mentioned that if the petitioner is keen to be appointed as a junior engineer, then it is open to him to participate in the selection, which is held by the state public service commission at regular intervals.
• It was added that if he is selected, then he can be appointed as a junior engineer in a government department accordingly. 
• The court mentioned that the reason assigned by the state government cannot be faulted. 
• Finding no scope for interference in the state government’s order, the high court dismissed the petition with no costs. 

Compassion can’t trump Constitution

In an unrelated case, the Calcutta High Court refused regularisation of a panchayat worker with over two decades of service, observing that the “courts cannot reward an appointment made through personal discretion disregarding the law”.

Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay further noted that compassion cannot “trump” the Constitution, and sentiment cannot substitute for statutory compliance.

“Courts cannot rehabilitate what the statute does not recognise. The remedy of regularisation is, therefore, untenable,” the court said in its December 2025 order.

The court further added that such appointments would only embolden “illegality and prejudice” affecting the rights of the countless eligible candidates or aspirants who never had the opportunity to compete.