Court rules that government cannot be compelled to wait for minor dependents to attain majority for compassionate appointments
In a significant ruling, the Rajasthan High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by Vikram Nath, whose application for compassionate appointment was rejected due to being a minor at the time of his father's death. The court held that the eligibility criteria for compassionate appointments, which include a minimum age requirement, cannot be contested.
The case arose when Vikram Nath, whose father, a Helper in the office of the Assistant Engineer in Sojat, passed away in May 2021, sought a compassionate appointment. At the time of his father's death, Vikram was 15 years and 3 months old, below the minimum age requirement of 16 years for such appointments. His application was rejected by Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., and the decision was communicated to him in February 2025.
The petitioner's counsel argued that the rejection was unsustainable in law, as no specific rule cited a minimum age of 16 at the time of the employee's death. He contended that the rules generally address eligibility at the time of application, not at the time of the employee's death. Furthermore, the counsel emphasized the prompt action required by employers in informing dependents of their rights under compassionate appointment schemes, especially in cases involving minors.
However, the court, presided over by Justice Kuldeep Mathur, disagreed with the petitioner's arguments. The judgment clarified that compassionate appointments are exceptions to standard recruitment processes and are intended to alleviate the hardship faced by families of deceased employees. The court noted that while no maximum age limit is prescribed for widows applying for compassionate appointments, there is a clear minimum age requirement for dependent children.
The court emphasized that the government cannot be compelled to keep the application alive indefinitely until a minor child reaches the age of majority. The petitioner’s inability to meet the minimum age criteria at the time of his father’s death justified the rejection of his application, rendering the impugned communication from Jodhpur Discom neither illegal nor arbitrary.
In light of these observations, the court dismissed the writ petition, marking a definitive stance on the interpretation and application of compassionate appointment rules regarding age criteria.
Bottom Line:
Compassionate appointment - Application of minor dependent rejected due to non-compliance with minimum age criteria at the time of employee's death - Held, Government cannot be compelled to wait indefinitely until minor child attains majority for employment application - Widow's application for compassionate appointment not subject to maximum age limit.
Statutory provision(s): Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Compassionate Appointment Rules
Vikram Nath v. State of Rajasthan, (Rajasthan) : Law Finder Doc id # 2865173
