The applicability of a modified scheme with respect to an appointment on the compassionate ground would be based on fixed criteria, Like date of death rather than intermediate factors Like date of consideration of the claim. Such an observation was made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court before Hon’ble Justice Hemant Gupta & Hon’ble Justice V. Ramasubramanian in the matter of THE SECRETARY TO GOVT. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (PRIMARY) & ORS. Vs BHEEMESH ALIAS BHEEMAPPA [Civil Appeal No. 7752 of 2021]
The facts arising to the case were that the respondent’s sister who was employed as Assistant Teacher in a Government School, died in harness on 8.12.2010, leaving behind her surviving, her mother, two brothers, and two sisters. Claiming that the deceased was unmarried and that the mother, two brothers, and two sisters were entirely dependent on her income, the respondent sought an appointment on compassionate grounds. The claim was rejected by the competent authority by an Order dated 17/21.11.2012. Aggrieved by the said order of rejection, the respondent moved to the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal which was allowed. Aggrieved, the State filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. The writ petition was dismissed by the High Court by an Order dated 20.11.2019, on the basis of the decision of another Division Bench of the Court, which held that the amendment to the Rules was retrospective in nature. Aggrieved, the state preferred the present appeal.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that The Rules as they stood, on the date on which the sister of the respondent died in harness, did not include an unmarried brother, within the definition of the expression “dependant of a deceased Government servant” under Rule 2(1)(a) of the said Rules visavis a deceased female unmarried Government servant. But it was only by way of an amendment proposed under a draft Notification dated 20.06.2012 which was given effect under the final Notification bearing No. DPAR 55 SCA 2012, Bangalore dated 11.07.2012 that an unmarried brother of a deceased female unmarried Government servant was included within the definition.
Additionally, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that “There is no principle of statutory interpretation which permits a decision on the applicability of a rule, to be based upon an indeterminate or variable factor. A rule of interpretation which produces different results, depending upon what the individuals do or do not do, is inconceivable.”
Finally, the Hon’ble Supreme Court allowed the present appeal in view of the above.
Click Here To Read The Judgment
Judgment Reviewed by: Rohan Kumar Thakur
