STATE OF U.P. & ORS. versus PANKAJ KUMAR VISHNOI

Citation: [2013] 7 S.C.R. 787 · Decided: 25-07-2013 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

[2013] 7 S.C.R. 787 
STATE OF U.P. & ORS. 
v. 
PANKAJ KUMAR VISHNOI 
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 2366-2367 of 2011) 
JULY 25, 2013 
[DIPAK MISRA AND VIKRAMAJIT SEN, JJ.) 
SeNice Law: 
A 
B 
Compassionate appointment of respondent as Constable c 
- Claim for appointment on compassionate ground as Sub-
Inspector, without appearing in physical test - Held: It is for 
the appointing authority to see that minimum standard of 
working and efficiency expected of the post is maintained -
The rule has merely dispensed with the written test or inteNiew 0 
by a selection committee, but not the maintenance of 
minimum standard of efficiency required for the post -
Respondent after being disqualified in the physical test could 
not have claimed as a matter of right appointment in respect 
of a particular post -
Circular issued by Inspector General 
E 
of Police is in consonance with r. 8(2) - Uttar Pradesh 
Recruitment of Dependants of Government SeNants Dying 
in Harness Rules, 1974 - rr. 5 and 8(2). 
Compassionate appointment - Object of - Explained -
Held: The posts in Classes Ill and IV are the lowest posts in 
F 
non-manual and manual categories and, therefore, they alone 
can be offered on compassionate grounds to relieve the 
family of the financial destitution and to help it get over the 
emergency -
The favourable treatment given to such 
dependant of the deceased employee in such posts has a 
G 
rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved viz. relief 
against destitution. 
The respondent was appointed as Constable on 
787 
H 
788 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2013) 7 S.C.R. 
A compassionate ground, as his father, a Head Constable 
of Police, had died while in service, on 22.04.2002. 
Subsequently, the respondent participated in physical 
test for the post of Sub-Inspector (Civil Police), but failed. 
He then filed a writ petition praying for compassionate 
B appointment on the post of Sub-Inspector (Civil Police) 
without subjecting him to appear in any physical test and 
interview. The single Judge dismissed the writ petition. 
However, the Division Bench allowed the respondent's 
writ appeal and directed the Department to once again 
c subject him to physical test. 
Disposing of the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. The Government or the public authority 
concerned has to examine the financial condition of the 
D family of the deceased, and it is only if it is satisfied that 
but for the provision of employment, the family will not 
be able to meet the crisis then a job is to be offered to 
the eligible member of the family. The object of 
compassionate employment is not to give a member of 
E such family a post much less a post for post held by the 
deceased. Mere death of an employee in harness does 
not entitle his family to such source of livelihood. The 
posts in Classes Ill and IV are the lowest posts in non-
manual and manual categories and, therefore, they alone 
F can be offered on compassionate grounds, the object 
being to relieve the family, of the financial destitution and 
to help it get over the emergency. The provision of 
employment in such lowest posts by making an 
exception to the rule is justifiable and valid since it is not 
discriminatory and has a rational nexus with the object 
· G sought to be achieved viz. relief against destitution. [Para 
10) [794-8-F] 
Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana (1994) 4 SCC 
138; SAIL v. Madhusudan Das 2008 (14) SCR 824 = (2008) 
H . 15 SCC 560; General Manager, State Bank of India and 
STATE OF U.P. & ORS. v. PANKAJ KUMAR VISHNOI 789 
Others v. Anju Jain 2008 (12) SCR 576 = (2008) 8 SCC 475; 
A 
· Union of India and Another v. Shashank Goswami and 
Another (2012) 11 SCC 307; State Bank of/ndia and Another 
v. Raj kumar (2010) 11 SCC 661 - relied on 
1.2. ·It is for the appointing authority to see that 8 
minimum standard of working and efficiency expected of 
the post is maintained. Rule 8 (2) of the Recruitment of 
Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness 
Rules, 1974 confers discretion on 'the appointing 
authority to interview the candidate in ·order to satisfy C 
himself that the candidate will be able to maintain the 
minimum standard of work and efficiency expected of the 
post What has been dispensed with is the written test or 
interview by a selection co'mmittee but not the 
maintenance of minimum standard and of efficiency 
required for the post. It is for the said reason that the 
D 
Inspector General has issued an order /letter, circular, 
w

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