S/L 16 07.07.2026 Court No.7 SD CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MAT 3 of 2026 CAN 2 of 2026 CAN 3 of 2026 Sunati Shil Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. S.M. Obaidullah Ms. Ankita Dey Mr. Ranjit Kumar Singh … for the Appellant. Mr. Kunaljit Bhattacharjee, Ld. AGP Ms. Rajni Singh Dev … for the State. Mr. Subhasish Misra … for the Respondent No.5-6. Re: CAN 2 of 2026 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept with the records. 2. This is an application for condonation of delay. 3. It appears from the report of the Stamp Reporter that there is a delay of one day in filing the instant appeal. 4. We have perused the application for condonation of delay and being satisfied with the explanation given in the application, condone the delay in filing the instant appeal. 5. Accordingly, CAN 2 of 2026 is allowed. Re: MAT 3 of 2026 6. The order dated November 27, 2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPA 2 1439 of 2025 has been impugned in the instant appeal. 7. The appellant seeks appointment on compassionate ground. Her mother expired in harness on November 20, 2007. She applied for compassionate appointment on January 7, 2008. The appellant is the married daughter of the deceased employee. She gave no objection certificate for providing appointment to her brothers. The brothers later expired on July 31, 2017 and December 22, 2021. The appellant thereafter applied afresh on May 24, 2024 seeking compassionate appointment which stood rejected by the respondent authority. 8. The appellant filed the writ petition challenging the reasoned order dated 13th Mary, 2025, issued by the Cooch Behar Zilla Regulated Market Committee, Cooch Behar rejecting her claim for compassionate appointment. 9. The learned Single Judge held that compassionate appointment is intended to provide immediate financial assistance to the family of the deceased employee who suffers sudden financial crises due to the death of the sole bread winner. 3 10. Learned advocate representing the appellant submits that as there was none left in the family, accordingly, she applied for being appointed on compassionate ground. 11. The law relating to appointment on compassionate ground is very well-settled. Compassionate appointment cannot be sought as a matter of right. The same is considered only to tide over the immediate financial crisis faced on the death of the bread winner. 12. In the instant case, the employee expired in 2007. The application made by the appellant in the year 2024 cannot be considered on compassionate ground as there is no scope for showing compassion to a candidate after such a long delay. 13. Had the appellant really faced any financial crisis then the application made by her on January 7, 2008 ought to have been proceeded with. The appellant did not proceed with the said application. On the contrary, she gave no objection for providing employment in favour of her brothers who also expired subsequently. The same implies that the appellant never faced any financial crisis requiring employment to be given to her. After her brothers expired in 2017 and 2021, the appellant waited for nearly three years and 4 thereafter applied afresh for appointment in May 2024. 14. This Court is of the opinion that the learned Single Judge rightly dismissed the writ petition as there is no scope for showing compassion at such a delayed point of time. 15. The appeal and the connected stay application fails and are hereby dismissed. 16. Parties to act on the basis of the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court. 17. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Amrita Sinha, J.) (Ajay Kumar Gupta, J.)