AHMEDNAGAR MAHANAGAR PALIKA versus AHMEDNAGAR MAHANAGAR PALIKA KAMGAR UNION

Citation: [2022] 7 S.C.R. 195 · Decided: 05-09-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
195
AHMEDNAGAR MAHANAGAR PALIKA
v.
AHMEDNAGAR MAHANAGAR PALIKA KAMGAR UNION
(Civil Appeal No. 5944 of 2022)
SEPTEMBER 05, 2022
[M. R. SHAH AND B. V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.]
Appointment – On Compassionate grounds – Ahmednagar
Municipal Council was converted to Ahmednagar Mahanagar
Palika / Municipal Corporation in 2003 – When the Council was in
existence, an industrial dispute was raised by Union – One demand
was with respect to employment to be given to heirs of the employees
– In  1981, the Industrial Court directed that the employees in Class-
IV category, if they die before their retirement; if they become
invalid, or if they retire, their heirs should be given appointment in
their place – In 2005 the Industrial Court modified the earlier award
whereby compassionate appointment to heirs of employees on their
superannuation /retirement was not provided and compassionate
appointment was provided only to heirs of deceased employees of
Class-IV category – Two other industrial dispute were raised by
Ahmednagar Mahanagar Palika Kamagar Union where employment
for heirs of retired employees as per award passed in 1981 was
claimed – By judgment and award of 2016, the Industrial Court
directed Ahmednagar Mahanagar Palika to provide employment to
heirs of employees on their retirement on attaining the age of
superannuation – High Court upheld the 2016 order of the Industrial
Court –  On appeal, held : The award of 1981 was passed when the
Municipal Council was in existence – After the Municipal Council
was converted into Municipal Corporation in 2003, its employees
were governed by scheme framed by the State government which
did not provide for appointment on compassionate grounds to heirs
of employees on their retirement or superannuation – Even
otherwise, appointment to heirs of employees on their retirement or
superannuation would be contrary to the object and purpose of
appointment on compassionate ground – If such an appointment is
permitted, outsiders shall never get an opportunity to get an
appointment though they may be more meritorious or more qualified
[2022] 7 S.C.R. 195
195
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
196
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 7 S.C.R.
– Such appointment would be violative of Arts. 14 and 15 of the
Constitution – Constitution of India.
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. In the year 2003, the Municipal Council has been
converted to Municipal Corporation /Mahanagar Palika and all
the employees under Mahanagar Palika/Municipal Corporation
are governed by the scheme/rules & regulations framed by the
State Government, which does not provide for any appointment
on compassionate grounds or the appointment to the heirs of the
employees on their superannuation /retirement. It was not open
for the Industrial Court and/or even the High Court to direct the
Mahanagar Palika/Municipal Corporation to provide appointment
to the heirs of the employees on their retirement/superannuation,
relying upon the judgment and award passed by the Industrial
Court in Reference IT No. 51 of 1979. [Paras 5 and 6][202-H;
203-A; 205-B-C]
2. After the conversion of the Municipal Council to
Municipal Corporation/Mahanagar Palika, the employees of the
Mahanagar Palika/Municipal Corporation shall be governed by
the scheme framed by the State Government and at par with the
government employees. The employees of the Mahanagar Palika/
Municipal Corporation shall be governed by the scheme of the
State Government at par with the government employees, which
does not provide for appointment on compassionate grounds to
the heirs of the employees on their retirement and/or
superannuation. [Para 7][205-C-F]
3. Even otherwise, such an appointment to the heirs of the
employees on their retirement and/or superannuation shall be
contrary to the object and purpose of appointment on
compassionate grounds and is hit by Article 14 of the Constitution
of India. The appointment on compassionate grounds is not
automatic and shall be subject to the strict scrutiny of various
parameters including the financial position of the family, the
economic dependence of the family upon the deceased employee
and the avocation of the other members of the family. No one can
claim to have a vested right for appointment on compassionate
grounds. Therefore, appointment on compassionate grounds
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
197
cannot be extended to the heirs of the employees on their
superannuation and/or retirement. If such an appointment is
permitted, in that case, outsiders shall never ge

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.