NIRMALA DEVI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS to whether a person .seeking compassionate appointment can insist that he or she should be appointed against a post which is above Class -IV, is the issue which is required to be gone into in these two appeals. There can be no dispute that the board proposition that a person seeking compassionate appointment has no absolute right to get a letter of appointment or to claim that he or she should be appointed against a particular post.

(2.) THE question arises as to what would be the position where the administrative authorities of their own lay down rules and indicate that where a person possesses a qualification then he is to be appointed in a particular manner. The appellants submit that under the Jammu and Kashmir Compassionate Appointment Rules of 1994. there is a clear provision that a person being offered compassionate appointment if he possesses Matriculation qualification then he or she is to be appointed against a post which is above Class - IV post. As a matter of fact this is so presided in Rule 3 of the aforementioned Rules. For facility of reference, this is being reproduced below: "3. Notwithstanding anything contained in any rule or order for the time being in force regulating the procedure for recruitment in any service or posts under the Government, an eligible family member of a person specified in Rule 2 may be appointed against a vacancy in the lowest rank of a non -gazzeted service having qualification above Matriculation of a Class -IV post if the candidate has read upto Matric 

(3.) THE short submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants that once the respondents decided to make compassionate appointmenl. then Rule 3 could not be ignored. This is the sum and substance of the argument put across by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants.