RENI K ABRAHAM Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that has come up for consideration in these cases is whether a married daughter of a person who died in harness would get the benefit of R.51B Chapter XIV-A of Kerala Education Rules in the case of teaching staff and under R.9A of Chapter XXIV-A of K.E.R. in the case of non teaching staff.

(2.) The object and purpose of granting compassionate employment is to give employment to the dependent of a family on the untimely death of the breadwinner. Claimants should have undergone normal selection process to get appointment but for the claim for compassionate appointment. As held by the Supreme Court in Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana 1994 (4) SCC 138 the whole object of granting compassionate employment is to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis. The object is not to give a member of such family a post much less a post for the post held by the deceased. The Supreme Court in Jagdish Prasad v. State of Bihar 1996 (1) SCC 301 observed that the very object of appointment of a dependant of the deceased employees who the in harness is to relieve unexpected immediate hardship and distress caused to the family by sudden demise of the earning member of the family. Above mentioned statutory provisions have been incorporated in the Kerala Education Rules to achieve objective mentioned herein before. Government have also issued various orders laying down eligibility criteria and also other procedural criteria to be followed

(3.) Previously various Government Orders held the field for giving benefit to a dependant of a person who died in harness. Those Government Orders were subsequently replaced by statutory provisions. In the instant case as far as teaching staff is concerned claim could be made under R.51 B of Chap.14A of K.E.R. which is extracted below: