The Supreme Court held that compassionate appointment is a concession intended to relieve immediate financial distress and does not confer a vested right. Once a dependent accepts appointment to a particular post on compassionate grounds they cannot seek appointment to a higher post on the basis of qualification or parity.
Jayabal and another respondent were appointed as sweepers on compassionate grounds following the death of their fathers, who were also sweepers. Several years after joining service, they approached the Madras High Court seeking appointment as Junior Assistants, contending that they possessed the requisite qualifications at the time of their initial appointment. A Single Judge allowed the writ petitions, and the Division Bench affirmed the decision, holding that the applicable Government Orders permitted appointment to a higher post.
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment. It held that compassionate appointment is an exception to the normal rule of public employment and is meant only to help the family tide over a sudden financial crisis. Once the appointment is accepted, the object of the scheme is fulfilled and no second option can be exercised. The Court further held that eligibility for a higher post does not create a right to compassionate appointment at that level.
Director of Town Panchayat v M. Jayabal
Citation: 2025 INSC 1423 | 2025 SCO.LR 12(3)[15]
12 December 2025
Case Comment
The law on the issue is well-settled. The issue as to whether a second option can be exercised by the dependent family member of the deceased employee, once option for compassionate appointment has already been exercised and the dependent family member of the deceased joined on the post to which appointment was given, was considered by this Court in State of Rajasthan v. Umrao Singh8. In this case, the deceased was working as Sub-Inspector, CID. On account of his death during service, application for appointment on compassionate basis was made. The dependant was offered appointment on the post of L.D.C. The same was accepted and the incumbent joined on the post. Later, he requested for consideration of his case for appointment on the post of Sub-Inspector, being eligible for the same. This Court negated the claim holding that once right for consideration for appointment on compassionate post was consummated, any further or second consideration for a higher post on the ground of compassion would not arise.
Bench: Justices Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan
Subscribe to our updates now and be the first to know about the latest news and developments. Subscribe here: https://legal.relegal.in/subscribe-newsletter/
#legalcousel #legalawareness #legaladvice #Article14 #Article16 #servicerules #compassionateground
Keywords/phrases: compassionate appointment–object and scope of compassionate employment–exception to Articles 14 and 16–no vested or enforceable right–acceptance of appointment exhausts claim–qualification irrelevant after acceptance–parity cannot be claimed on the basis of illegal appointments–negative equality impermissible
Read the Judgement here.