Patna High Court
Aman KumarversusThe Union of India
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is not eligible for compassionate appointment and that the order rejecting his application is lawful.
Summary
The petitioner, Aman Kumar, sought a compassionate appointment in the Navy after his father, a sailor, was discharged in 1994 due to chronic schizophrenia. He filed a writ petition in 2022 requesting the court to direct the Ministry of Defence to consider his application, which had been rejected in 2018. The respondents argued that the petitioner was only three years old at the time of his father's discharge and that the purpose of compassionate appointments is to relieve immediate economic distress of the family, which was not applicable. The court examined the eligibility criteria of the compassionate appointment scheme and the delay in filing the writ. Finding no illegality in the 2018 order and noting that the petitioner’s claim did not meet the scheme’s purpose, the court dismissed the writ application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is eligible for a compassionate appointment under the scheme given his age at the time of his father's discharge
- Whether the order rejecting the petitioner's application is illegal or violative of any statutory provision
- Maintainability of the writ petition filed after a considerable delay
Subjects
- compassionate appointment
- writ of mandamus
- Ministry of Defence
- economic distress
- eligibility criteria
- delay in filing
- civil writ jurisdiction
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.179 of 2022
======================================================
Aman Kumar S/o Prakash Kumar Srivastava, Resident of Village-Pakri
Ismail, Post-Ladaura Pakri, District-Muzaffarpur, Pin-843113.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence (Navy), C-
Wing, Sena Bhawan, New Delhi-110011.
2. The Director, Integrated Headquarters, Ministry of Defence (Navy), Sena
Bhawan, New Delhi-110011.
3. The Commander, Bureau of Sailors, Cheetah Camp, Mankhurd, Mumbai-
400088.
4. The Flag officer Commanding-in-Chief, Headquarters, Eastern Naval
Command, Naval Base, Visakhapatnam-530014.
5. The Commander JDESA (VSF), Directorate of Ex-Serviceman Affairs,
Integrated Headquarters, Ministry of Defence (N), 6th Floor, Chanakya
Bhawan, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi-110021.
6. The Under Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions
(Department of Personnel and Training), Govt. of India, North Block, New
Delhi-110021.
7. The Vice Admiral HCS, Controller of Personnel Services, Room No. 241,
Integrated Headquarter, Ministry of Defence (Navy), C-Wing, Sena Bhawan,
New Delhi-110011.
8. Senior Administrator Officer, Command Civilian Personnel Officer, For Flag
Officer, Commanding-in-Chief, Headquarters, Eastern Naval Command,
Naval Base, Visakhapatnam.
9. The Secretary, the Zila Sainik Kalyan Karyalaya, Muzaffarpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kaushalesh Choudhary, Advocate
For the UOI : Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, Sr. CGC
Mr. R.K. Sharma, CGC
Mr. Lokesh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 06-04-2026
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the respondents.
Patna High Court CWJC No.179 of 2022 dt.06-04-2026
2/6
2. The petitioner has filed the instant application for
the following reliefs:
“1. i. For issuance of
appropriate writ(s)/ Rule(s)/
Direction(s) in the nature of
mandamus, commanding the
concerned respondents, for
consideration of the petitioner's case
for his appointment on compassionate
ground, as his father Sri Prakash
Kumar Srivastava, Ex. CK(S)i
151473-H has been discharged from
the Naval service on 06th April, 1994,
after declaring him physically unfit
for the job, due to suffering from the
disease chronic Schizophrenia.
ii. For issuance of the
direction to the concerned
respondents to consider the
petitioner's claim for compassionate
ground appointment as per Letter No.
DX/VSF/96/2/14 dated 08th of
January, 2015, issued by the
Commander, JDESA (VSF), the
Directorate of Ex-Serviceman Affairs,
Integrated Headquarters (MOD N) 6th
Floor, Chanakya Bhawan,
Chanakyapuri, New Delhi- 110021,
and as per provisions stated under
Patna High Court CWJC No.179 of 2022 dt.06-04-2026
3/6
Letter No. F.No14014/02/2012-Estt.
(D), the Ministry of Personnel, Public
Grievances and Pensions, North Block
New Delhi.
iii. For quashing the
order contained in Letter No.
CE/2000/5/EA/XIXBd/(i) dated
25.07.2018, issued by the Senior
Administrator Officer, Command
Civilian Personnel Officer, for Flag
Officer, Commanding -in-Chief,
Headquarters, Eastern Naval
Command, Naval Base,
Visakhapatnam, by which the
petitioner's claim for compassionate
appointment has been rejected, on
erroneous consideration.
iv. And For grant of all
other relief(s) to which the petitioner
may found entitled, on the facts and
circumstances of the case.”
3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that the
petitioner’s father who was working as a sailor (CK (S) 1) in the
Navy under the Ministry of Defence of the Union of India was
suffering from schizophrenia. He was declared unfit and
discharged from service on 31.3.1994.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner
having been born on 14.5.1991, his father filed an application
Patna High Court CWJC No.179 of 2022 dt.06-04-2026
4/6
for his appointment on compassionate ground on 31.1.2015. The
same came to be rejected by the order impugned dated
25.7.2018 (Annexure-P/11) issued under the signature of the
Senior Administrator Officer, Command Civilian Personnel
Officer for Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief at headquarters
Eastern Naval Command, Naval Base, Visakhapatnam.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner having attained majority, his father once again
filed an application for his appointment on compassionate
ground. The scheme for compassionate appointment provides
for consideration of applications filed belatedly and the
respondents have erred in not considering the application of the
petitioner and not appointing him in place of his father.
6. The application is opposed by learned Senior
Panel Counsel appearing for the Union of India who submits
that besides the question of maintainability of the instant writ
application, the petitioner was only 3 years old on the date his
father was declared unfit. Further from the order impugned
dated 25.7.2018, it would transpire that the respondents
considered the request of the petitioner keeping in mind the
concept behind grant of compassionate appointment which
relates to meeting the needs for immediate assistance to the
Patna High Court CWJC No.179 of 2022 dt.06-04-2026
5/6
family of the Government servant in order to relieve it from
economic distress. It is thus submitted that there is no illegality
in the order impugned and the writ application be dismissed.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
having perused the contents of the petition, it transpires that the
father of the petitioner who was employed in the Navy was
declared unfit as a result of suffering from schizophrenia in
March, 1994. The petitioner was aged only about 3 years on the
said date having been born on 14.5.1991.
8. Even taking into consideration the fact that the
petitioner filed his application on attaining majority, the purpose
of compassionate appointment being to give assistance to the
family of the employee who has died or been discharged on
medical grounds as in the instant case to meet the immediate
economic distress, the application of the petitioner is fit to be
rejected on this ground alone.
9. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances of the case, the respondent authorities rejected
the application of the petitioner on compassionate ground by
order dated 25.7.2018. Even after passing of the said order, once
again the petitioner waited for more than three and a half years
before filing the instant writ application in January, 2022.
Patna High Court CWJC No.179 of 2022 dt.06-04-2026
6/6
10. For all the above reasons, the Court finds no
illegality in the order impugned nor any merit in the instant writ
application.
11. The application is rejected.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 8.4.2026
Transmission Date NA
Checking your session…