2025:JHHC:24906 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.2866 of 2025 ------ Premchand Tanti, S/o Late Shankar Tanti, R/o Village Ramada, P.O. Hatya, P.S. Chakradharpur, District West Singhbhum, Chaibasa. … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand, through Chief Secretary, having its office at Project Building, under P.O. & P.S. Jaganathpur, District Ranchi. 2. Deputy Commissioner, Chaibasa, having its office under P.O. & P.S. Chaibasa, District West Singhbhum. … … Respondents ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashok Kr. Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent(s): Mr. Aditya Kumar, AC to Sr. SC-I ------ 04/ 22.08.2025 Heard learned counsel representing the petitioner and learned counsel representing the respondents. 2. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner prays for appointment on compassionate ground. 3. It is the case of this petitioner that his father – Late Shankar Tanti, who was a Chowkidar, died in harness. Since the father of the petitioner died in harness, the petitioner being his son, is entitled to be appointed on compassionate ground, thus, he claims such appointment. 4. Learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that after the death of father of the petitioner, his mother became mentally unstable and at that time he was minor, however, she managed to apply for compassionate appointment for the petitioner on 05.09.2012. Thus, the petitioner’s case should be considered as now he became major. 5. Learned counsel representing the respondents submits that there is a delay in approaching this Court and even at the time of filing of application, the petitioner was minor and after seven years, he became major. Since a considerable time has lapsed and the crisis is over, he is not entitled to be given compassionate appointment. 6. After going through the entire writ petition, and the 2025:JHHC:24906 2 annexures of the petition, I find that the father of this petitioner died sometime in the year 2008. 7. The instant writ petition relates to grant of compassionate appointment. Appointment on compassionate ground is not a source of recruitment. The same is an exception to the Constitutional provision. The basic purpose of compassionate appointment is to grant immediate financial relief to the family members of the deceased employee. To overcome the sudden financial crisis of the family of the deceased employee, compassionate appointment is granted. The purpose of providing compassionate appointment is to mitigate the hardship due to the sudden death of the bread winner of the family. It is the immediate financial crisis which needs to be addressed by giving compassionate appointment. Due to passage of time, the family overcomes the immediate financial crisis thus, the need of compassionate appointment does not remain after lapse of a considerable period. 8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of West Bengal Vs. Debabrata Tiwari & Ors. reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 219, at para-32 and 57, held as hereunder:- 32. On consideration of the aforesaid decisions of this Court, the following principles emerge: i. That a provision for compassionate appointment makes a departure from the general provisions providing for appointment to a post by following a particular procedure of recruitment. Since such a provision enables appointment being made without following the said procedure, it is in the nature of an exception to the general provisions and must be resorted to only in order to achieve the stated objectives, i.e., to enable the family of the deceased to get over the sudden financial crisis. ii. Appointment on compassionate grounds is not a source of recruitment. The reason for making such a benevolent scheme by the State or the public sector undertaking is to see that the dependants of the deceased are not deprived of the means of livelihood. It only enables the family of the deceased to get over the sudden financial crisis. iii. Compassionate appointment is not a vested right which can be exercised at any time in future. Compassionate employment cannot be claimed or offered after a lapse of time and after the crisis is over. iv. That compassionate appointment should be provided immediately to redeem the family in distress. It is improper to keep such a case pending for years. v. In determining as to whether the family is in financial crisis, all relevant aspects must be borne in mind including 2025:JHHC:24906 3 the income of the family, its liabilities, the terminal benefits if any, received by the family, the age, dependency and marital status of its members, together with the income from any other source. 57. The existence of a policy issued by the State Government is a sine qua non for making appointments on compassionate basis, vide Mumtaz Yunus Mulani (Smt.) v. State of Maharashtra (supra); State Bank of India v. Surya Narain Tripathi, (2014) 15 SCC 739. The appointments must follow the stipulations made in the policy. It is therefore a no-brainer that in the absence of a policy governing compassionate appointment to posts under a local authority, no appointment could be made to such an authority on compassionate grounds.” 9. After 17 years of the death of an employee, the petitioner who happens to be the son, is approaching this Court for grant of compassionate appointment. The delay of 17 years has definitely defeated the claim of compassionate appointment. The family of the deceased has definitely tied over the immediate financial crisis. Now seventeen years have lapsed from the date of death of the employee. The family has survived for this long seventeen years. When the family has survived for seventeen years, now no compassion remains. 10. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Prashant.Cp-2