Patna High Court: 5-year limit for compassionate appointment starts from cause of action, not death date.
Patna High Court has made a significant ruling in favor of a deceased constable's son, allowing his appeal for a compassionate appointment. The son had applied for the appointment in 2013, but was rejected due to a five-year delay. However, the court observed that the son and his mother were unable to apply earlier as the constable's dismissal order was still in effect. The court ruled that the five-year timeline starts from the date the dismissal order was set aside, providing clarity on compassionate appointments and ensuring fairness for applicants.
11/24/20241 min read
In a significant ruling, a Division Bench of the Patna High Court, consisting of Justices P. B. Bajanthri and S. B. Pd. Singh, allowed an appeal against the decision of a Single Judge Bench, which had rejected an application for compassionate appointment on the grounds of delay. The case centered on an application for compassionate appointment to the post of Constable, filed by the appellant (the son of a deceased constable), whose father, Satyendra Singh, had been dismissed from service and passed away shortly thereafter.
Satyendra Singh, a constable, was dismissed from service on 8th December 2004, and he passed away on 9th December 2005. His wife filed appeals and memorials, challenging the dismissal order, but these were dismissed. The wife and the appellant (her son) could not seek compassionate appointment immediately after the father’s death because the dismissal order was still in effect.
The dismissal order was eventually set aside by the authorities on 26th April 2011, which was a critical development in the case. The appellant sought compassionate appointment to the post of constable on 1st October 2013. However, the Single Judge Bench rejected the application, citing that it was filed beyond the stipulated five-year period from the death of the father.
The Division Bench observed that both the appellant and his mother could not have applied for compassionate appointment before 26th April 2011, as the dismissal order had not been overturned by then. The Court highlighted that the cause of action to seek compassionate appointment only arose when the dismissal order was quashed, which occurred on 26th April 2011.
The Division Bench criticized the Single Judge's failure to account for the fact that the appellant and his mother were legally unable to seek appointment before that date. It ruled that the five-year time limit for seeking compassionate appointment should be calculated from the date the dismissal order was set aside, not from the date of death of the constable.
Thus, the Division Bench allowed the appeal, granting the appellant the opportunity to seek compassionate appointment, in line with the legal principles governing such applications.