Thursday, May 15, 2025
spot_img

Can’t discriminate against son of second wife in compassionate appointment: SC

Date:

Share post:

spot_imgspot_img

New Delhi, Feb 24: The Supreme Court on Thursday said the compassionate appointment policy cannot discriminate against a person only on the ground of descent, as it would violate fundamental right and also go against dignity of his family.

A bench of Justices U.U. Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat, and P.S. Narasimha said: “Familial origins include the validity of the marriage of the parents of a claimant of compassionate appointment and the claimant’s legitimacy as their child.”

Justice Narasimha, who authored the judgment on behalf of the bench, said: “The policy cannot discriminate against a person only on the ground of descent by classifying children of the deceased employee as legitimate and illegitimate and recognizing only the right of legitimate descendant.”

He added that exclusion of one class of legitimate children would fail to meet the test of nexus with the object, and it would defeat the purpose of ensuring the dignity of the family of the deceased employee.

The top court judgment came on an appeal where compassionate appointment plea of a deceased employee’s second wife’s son, was declined citing the condition imposed by the Railway Board circular. According to this circular, compassionate appointment cannot be granted to children born from the second wife of a deceased employee. The decision was upheld by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna and later by the Patna High Court.

Justice Narasimha said: “While compassionate appointment is an exception to the constitutional guarantee under Article 16, a policy for compassionate appointment must be consistent with the mandate of Articles 14 and 16. That is to say, a policy for compassionate appointment, which has the force of law, must not discriminate on any of the grounds mentioned in Article 16(2), including that of descent.”

The bench noted that the circular creates two categories between one class, and it has no nexus to the objects sought to be achieved. “Once the law has deemed them legitimate, it would be impermissible to exclude them from being considered under the policy,” it said.

Setting the high court judgment passed in January 2018, the bench said: “We have held that appellant No.1, Mukesh Kumar, cannot be denied consideration under the scheme of compassionate appointments only because he is the son of the second wife, there shall be a direction to consider his case as per the extant policy.” At one place in the order, the name was wrongly rendered as Manish Kumar)

The bench directed the authorities to scrutinise whether the application for compassionate appointment fulfils all other requirements in accordance with the law, and the process of consideration of the application shall be completed within a period of three months from Thursday.

IANS
spot_imgspot_img

Related articles

Frame guidelines for pedestrian walkways, SC tells states & UTs

New Delhi, May 14: The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed all states and union territories to frame guidelines...

India sure to be Naxal-free by March 31, 2026: Shah

New Delhi, May 14: Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Wednesday said the security forces have achieved a...

World Watch

One killed in attack on pro-army rally in Pakistan Islamabad, May 14: A suspected militant on a motorcycle threw...

Dadenggre-ko district songchina dabianiko GSU gisik ra·attaia

TURA: Dadenggre Civil Sub-Division-ko district-ni gadangona ra·doatchina dabiani da·o bilsi 26 ong·pilengahaoba chu·sokate on·chipkujaenga ine Garo Students Union...