Bengaluru: A compassionate appointment is a one-time measure arising from an exceptional circumstance and cannot be converted into a recurring claim for higher posts or better service benefits, Dharwad bench of Karnataka high court has ruled.A division bench of Justices M Nagaprasanna and Hema Kulkarni, in a judgement delivered on Sept 22, also cautioned state govt against allowing transposition from one Group C post to another merely because a compassionate appointee possesses higher educational qualifications.The court made the observations while allowing petitions filed by govt and reversing orders of Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal (KSAT) in two cases involving Sathish V Gulla and Sandeep Kumar V Kulkarni.Both men had been appointed under the compassionate appointment scheme to the post of second division assistant (SDA). KSAT had directed govt to consider their cases for appointment as first division assistants (FDAs), taking into account their higher educational qualifications.Govt challenged the orders, contending that compassionate appointment was not a form of direct recruitment in which qualifications and other eligibility criteria were assessed for appointment to a higher post.The high court agreed with govt’s position, holding that the purpose of compassionate appointment was to provide immediate financial assistance to a family suddenly deprived of its breadwinner.“Once that compassion has translated itself into public employment and the appointment has been accepted, the stream of compassion cannot be permitted to flow endlessly into claims for higher posts, better cadres or superior service benefits,” the bench observed.It said the purpose of the scheme was fulfilled once the eligible family member was appointed to the post contemplated under it. Possession of qualifications for a higher post, by itself, could not justify invoking compassion afresh for appointment to that post.The bench also warned govt about making individual exceptions outside the governing scheme. Picking and choosing individuals for such benefits, it said, could disturb administrative discipline and lead to grievances of unequal treatment.“Administrative aberrations, if repeated, have an uncanny tendency to masquerade as precedents and thereafter multiply into litigation,” the bench observed.Against this backdrop, the court directed that govt ensure uniform adherence to the applicable scheme and avoid repeating such departures.
