Arun Sharma vs DEFENCE on 29 October 2026

1. Arun Sharma, aged 29 years, S/o Late Sh. Shiv Lal, SD No. 525129, R/o Village Ghordi Khas, Tehsil Ramnagar, District Udhampur, Jammu and Kashmir – 182122. …..Applicant (Through Advocate: Mr. Nitin Bhasin) VERSUS

1. Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Defence, South Block, New Delhi – 110011.

2. Directorate General of Staff Duties, SD-7 (Adm Div), General Staff Branch, Integrated Headquarters of Ministry of Defence (Army), DHQ PO, New Delhi – 110011.

3. General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Headquarters Northern Command, GS/SD, PIN 908545, C/o 56 APO.

4. Station Staff Officer, Station Headquarters, Leh, PIN 908602, C/o 56 APO. .....Respondents (Through Advocate: Mr. Raghu Mehta, ld. Sr. C.G.S.C.)

PATHANIA

RAJAT SINGH PATHANIA

:: 2 :: O.A. No. 61/2054/ 2025

O R D E R (Final) Sh. Ram Mohan Johri, Administrative Member This is an Original Application filed by the applicant under Section-19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:- “i. To direct the respondents to process the case of the applicant and appoint him on compassionate grounds against any suitable vacancy in the department; Any other relief which this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. The applicant has filed the present Original Application seeking a direction to the respondents to process and consider his case for appointment on compassionate grounds against a suitable vacancy in the department, consequent upon the death of his father, Late Sh. Shiv Lal, who was serving as a Safaiwala at Station Headquarters, Leh, and died in harness on 12.07.2021.

3. The case of the applicant is that his deceased father was the sole breadwinner of the family, comprising his widow, one daughter and two sons, including the applicant. After the untimely demise of his father, the family was allegedly left in severe financial distress. The applicant, therefore, submitted an application seeking compassionate appointment to provide financial assistance to the bereaved family. Upon receipt of the application, respondent No. 4, vide communication dated 16.11.2022, called upon the applicant's mother to submit a fresh

PATHANIA

RAJAT SINGH PATHANIA

:: 3 :: O.A. No. 61/2054/ 2025

application along with the requisite supporting documents. The applicant claims to have complied with the said requirement and submitted a fresh application along with the necessary documents.

4. It is further the case of the applicant that, instead of processing his application, respondent No. 4 informed him vide communication dated 27.03.2023 that his case had been kept in abeyance in view of directions issued by the Integrated Headquarters of the Ministry of Defence (Army). The applicant thereafter submitted several representations requesting the authorities to consider his claim in view of the financial hardship allegedly being faced by his family. However, the respondents continued to inform him that the matter was pending in view of the aforesaid directions. The applicant also served a legal notice dated 24.12.2024 seeking consideration of his claim, but no final decision was communicated to him. Aggrieved by the continued pendency of his case, the applicant has approached this Tribunal seeking appropriate relief.

5. The respondents, in their reply, have not disputed the death of the applicant's father in harness or the receipt of the application seeking compassionate appointment. Their principal contention is that the Integrated Headquarters of the Ministry of

PATHANIA

RAJAT SINGH PATHANIA

:: 4 :: O.A. No. 61/2054/ 2025

Defence (Army), vide letter dated 23.11.2022, issued directions to keep appointments on compassionate grounds in respect of dependants of deceased conservancy Safaiwalas recruited during 1996 and onwards in abeyance until a final decision on the subject. The respondents have accordingly submitted that the applicant's case could not be processed in view of the aforesaid directions. They have further stated that the application of the applicant was forwarded to the higher headquarters vide communication dated 09.12.2023 and that further correspondence was undertaken with the competent authorities, including vide communication dated 11.11.2024. The respondents, therefore, seek to justify the non-processing of the applicant's claim on the ground that the matter is governed by the aforesaid policy directions.

6. We have heard learned counsel on both sides. The principal question which arises for consideration is whether the applicant's claim for compassionate appointment can be allowed to remain pending indefinitely merely because the matter has been kept in abeyance pursuant to the policy directions dated 23.11.2022, without a final decision being taken on his individual claim.

7. It is well settled that compassionate appointment is intended to provide immediate relief to the family of a government

PATHANIA

RAJAT SINGH PATHANIA

:: 5 :: O.A. No. 61/2054/ 2025

employee who dies in harness, subject to the applicable scheme, eligibility conditions, availability of vacancies and the prescribed criteria. Such appointment is an exception to the normal recruitment process and cannot be claimed as an automatic or vested right merely on account of the death of the employee. Nevertheless, where a claim for compassionate appointment is made under the applicable scheme, the same is required to be considered fairly, objectively and in accordance with the governing rules and policy.

8. In the present case, the death of the applicant's father in harness and the submission of the application seeking compassionate appointment are not in dispute. The respondents have themselves acknowledged the receipt of the application and have explained that the same was not processed in view of the directions contained in the communication dated 23.11.2022. Their reply, however, does not disclose that the applicant's claim has been finally examined on its individual merits by the competent authority, nor does it indicate that any final decision determining his eligibility or suitability under the applicable scheme has been communicated to him.

9. The material placed on record further reveals that the applicant has been pursuing his claim through repeated

PATHANIA

RAJAT SINGH PATHANIA

:: 6 :: O.A. No. 61/2054/ 2025

representations and that the respondents have, from time to time, informed him about the pendency of the matter before the higher authorities. The communications dated 27.03.2023, 22.09.2023, 07.11.2023 and 28.03.2024, as referred to in the pleadings, indicate that the applicant has been awaiting a decision for a considerable period. The respondents have also acknowledged that his application was forwarded to the higher headquarters and that further correspondence was undertaken in the matter.

10. We are conscious of the fact that the respondents are required to comply with the policy instructions issued by the competent authority and that this Tribunal cannot, in the absence of the complete policy record, direct the respondents to disregard the communication dated 23.11.2022. The competent authority is required to examine the precise scope and continuing applicability of the said communication, any subsequent instructions or decision issued on the subject, and the rules governing compassionate appointment, before arriving at a conclusion regarding the applicant's entitlement.

11. The applicant has asserted that his family continues to suffer financial hardship and that the family pension of the deceased employee is the only source of income available to the family. The competent authority is, therefore, required to examine

PATHANIA

RAJAT SINGH PATHANIA

:: 7 :: O.A. No. 61/2054/ 2025

the relevant family and financial circumstances reflected in the record, along with the other eligibility conditions and criteria prescribed under the governing policy.

12. In view of the foregoing discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to have his claim considered and brought to a logical conclusion through a reasoned decision by the competent authority. The applicant cannot be left indefinitely without being informed of the outcome of his claim, particularly when the respondents have neither disputed the receipt of his application nor placed on record any final decision on its individual merits.

13. Accordingly, the present Original Application is disposed of with the direction to the competent respondent authority, particularly respondent No. 2, in coordination with the other concerned respondents, to examine and take a final decision on the applicant's pending claim for compassionate appointment in accordance with the applicable rules, scheme and policy instructions governing the subject. While doing so, the competent authority shall examine the scope and applicability of the communication dated 23.11.2022, any subsequent instructions or final decision issued by the competent authority, the applicant's eligibility under the applicable scheme, the relevant family and

PATHANIA

RAJAT SINGH PATHANIA

:: 8 :: O.A. No. 61/2054/ 2025

financial circumstances, and the availability of a suitable vacancy, wherever required under the governing policy.

14. The competent authority shall undertake the aforesaid exercise on the individual merits of the applicant's case. A reasoned and speaking order shall be passed within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, and the decision so taken shall be communicated to the applicant forthwith. If the applicant is found eligible and his claim is admissible under the applicable scheme, the respondents shall take consequential action in accordance with the governing rules.

15. The Original Application stands disposed of in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs.

(DIWAKAR SINGH)

(RAM MOHAN JOHRI) Judicial Member Administrative Member RS Pathania Steno-D

PATHANIA

RAJAT SINGH PATHANIA