Patna High Court
Md. JawedversusThe Accountant General (A and E), Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The petitioner's application is barred by limitation and delay, and compassionate appointment cannot be granted after such lapse, so the CAT's order stands.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Jawed, sought appointment on compassionate ground after his father, a clerk in the Accountant General's office, died in 2015. The Departmental Screening Committee evaluated his application in 2016 and found him unfit, communicating the decision to his mother in 2017, 2018 and 2019. The petitioner did not challenge these decisions and only filed a writ petition in 2025, seeking appointment despite an 11‑year lapse. The High Court held that the petition was barred by limitation, delay and laches, and that compassionate appointments are intended only to address the immediate financial crisis at the time of death, not as a vested right after a long period. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the CAT's order.
Issues considered
- The petitioner's application for compassionate appointment is barred by limitation and delay.
- Whether compassionate appointment can be granted after a substantial lapse of time since the death of the employee.
- Whether the CAT's dismissal of the original application was legally justified.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- compassionate appointment
- limitation
- delay
- laches
- Central Administrative Tribunal
- Right to Information Act
- government servant
- writ petition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 820 of 2026
======================================================
Md. Jawed S/o Late Bashir Ahmad, Resident of Village-Harpur Mahamada,
PO and PS-Pusa, District-Sitamarhi, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The Accountant General (A and E), Bihar Patna-800001.
2. The Senior Accounts Officer, Office of the Accountant General (A and E),
Bihar, Patna-800001.
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance:
For the Petitioner : Mr. Wasi Akhtar, Advocate
Mr. Noumaan Ahmad, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Amarshakti, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH)
Date: 10-03-2026
The present writ petition has been filed assailing the order
dated 13.08.2025, passed by the learned Central Administrative
Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Ld.
CAT’) in O.A. No. 050/00440/2025, whereby and whereunder
not only the Original Application filed by the petitioner has been
dismissed in limine but the miscellaneous application filed for
condonation of delay has also been found to be lacking any
merit, hence, the Original Application has also been rejected on
the ground of being barred by limitation in addition to merit
Patna High Court CWJC No.820 of 2026 dt.10-03-2026
2/14
discussed in the impugned order dated 13.08.2025.
2. The brief facts of the case, according to the writ
petitioner are that the father of the petitioner, while working as
Clerk in the office of the Accountant General (A & E), Bihar,
Patna died in harness on 8.7.2015 leaving behind his widow,
five sons and one daughter. It is contended by the learned
counsel for the petitioner that as far as the sister of the petitioner
is concerned, she is married and in fact, the petitioner is the only
legal heir of the deceased employee, who is in dire need of
employment.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that a bare perusal of the minutes dated 04.10.2016 of the
Departmental Screening Committee, constituted by the office of
the Accountant General (A & E), Bihar, Patna for considering
the cases of appointment on compassionate ground, vide order
dated 28.09.2016, is perverse, inasmuch as though it has taken
into consideration the fact that the family of late Bashir Ahmad
(deceased father of the petitioner) resides in own kachcha house
having one bigha agricultural land and some of the family
members are engaged in private work and are also studying
while the petitioner has applied for consideration of his case for
appointment on compassionate ground but the weightage, as per
Patna High Court CWJC No.820 of 2026 dt.10-03-2026
3/14
the evaluation system, has not been given properly, hence the
marks obtained by the petitioner are much less than what it
should have actually been, resulting in the petitioner not making
it in the merit list. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in
dire need of employment inasmuch as he is living in penury.
4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents has
submitted that the Original Application filed by the petitioner is
barred by the principles of delay and laches, inasmuch as though
the Departmental Screening Committee had taken a decision in
its meeting held on 04.10.2016, about which information was
given to the mother of the petitioner as long back as on
20.09.2017 by a letter written by the Senior Deputy Accountant
General (Administration) wherein it had been categorically
stated that the petitioner has been found unfit for appointment
on compassionate ground, however the petitioner did not choose
to challenge the same for a long period of about 8½ years and
the petitioner approached the Ld. CAT only in the year 2025. It
is further submitted that the object of compassionate
appointment is to enable the family to tide over the financial
crisis that it faces at the time of the death of sole breadwinner,
however in the present case now about 11 years have passed
since the death of the father of the petitioner, hence the
Patna High Court CWJC No.820 of 2026 dt.10-03-2026
4/14
petitioner cannot use the scheme of compassionate appointment
as a means to enter the services of the respondents.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. The
facts of the case lie in a narrow compass inasmuch as the
father of the petitioner died in harness on 08.07.2015, while
working as Clerk in the office of the Accountant General (A &
E) Bihar, Patna. Thereafter, the petitioner with the consent of the
other family members including his sister had filed an
application for appointment on compassionate ground,
whereafter a Departmental Screening Committee was
constituted to consider the case of the petitioner and others for
appointment on compassionate ground. The Departmental
Screening Committee held a meeting on 04.10.2016 wherein the
case of the petitioner was also considered and the committee
came to the following findings:
“Md. Jawed, S/o Late Basir Ahmad, Ex. Clerk
It has been reported to the Screening Committee
that Late Basir Ahmad, Ex. Clerk died on 08.07.2015
leaving behind his wife, five major sons and one married
daughter out of which one son i.e. Md. Javed (the
applicant) is dependent. The family of Late Basir Ahmad
was paid terminal benefit of Rs. 9,81,063/- and the family
pension @ Rs. 5990/- per month w.e.f. 09.07.2015
(enhanced rate) paid to his widow. The normal family
Patna High Court CWJC No.820 of 2026 dt.10-03-2026
5/14
pension @ Rs. 3594/- p.m. with Dearness Relief will be
admissible w.e.f. 09.07.2025.
It has been reported in verification report that the
family of Late Basir Ahmad reside in own Kaccha house
having one bigha agricultural land (approx). Some of the
family members are engaged in private work and some
are studying. Sri Md. Jawed (D.O.B.-24.10.1995)
youngest son of Late Bashir Ahmad has applied for
consideration of his case for appointment on
compassionate ground. The other family members have
given their consent to consider the case of Md. Jawed for
compassionate appointment through affidavits.
Earlier the Departmental Screening Committee
met on 20.06.2016 and was of the opinion that a clear
verification report and date of birth certificate issued by
the municipal corporation may be obtained.
The verification report has again been obtained
through Welfare Officer Md. Jawed has also submitted
his date of birth certificate from the municipal
corporation.
It has been observed by the committee from
verification report that the four sons of the deceased
government servant are engaged in private job. The only
daughter is married. There is no liability in the family.
The status of family seems to be comfortable.
The committee has evaluated the case of Md.
Jawed on different parameters as prescribed by
Headquarters office circular No.34 issued vide No. 09-
Patna High Court CWJC No.820 of 2026 dt.10-03-2026
6/14
Staff-Entt. (Rules)/C.A./12-2015 dated 28.9.2016. Md.
Jawed scored 65 marks out of 165 marks and got 6 th
position among the seven candidates. Md. Jawed possess
qualification of graduation. The committee after
considering all the aspects is of the opinion that there is
no need of immediate assistance.
Keeping in view the financial status, job in family
and marks scored by the candidate by evaluating on
different parameters, the committee did not find the name
of Md. Jawed fit for appointment on compassionate
ground.”
6. The aforesaid decision of the Departmental Screening
Committee regarding the petitioner having been found unfit for
appointment on compassionate ground was communicated to
the mother of the petitioner by the Senior Deputy Accountant
General (Administration) Bihar, Patna vide letter dated
20.09.2017 but the same was not challenged by the petitioner. In
fact, in reference to the subsequent applications made by the
petitioner, the mother of the petitioner was again intimated vide
letter dated 05.11.2018 with regard to the case of the petitioner
being found unfit for appointment on compassionate ground but
the same was also not challenged by the petitioner.
7. It appears that the petitioner had subsequently filed an
application under Right to Information Act, 2005 in response
Patna High Court CWJC No.820 of 2026 dt.10-03-2026
7/14
whereof, the Public Information Officer-cum-Deputy
Accountant General (Administration) vide letter dated
11.03.2019, while enclosing a copy of the minutes of the
Departmental Screening Committee, had intimated the
petitioner about the decision taken by the said committee. The
petitioner had then filed an Original Application bearing OA No.
66 of 2022, however the same was withdrawn and in fact the
learned CAT by an order dated 28.01.2022 had passed an order
to the effect that the Original Application is disposed of as
withdrawn. Nonetheless, the petitioner had filed yet another
Original Application, i.e., the connected one, inter alia praying
therein for directing the respondent to appoint the petitioner on
compassionate ground, however the aforesaid orders/letters dt.
20.09.2017, 05.11.2018 and 11.03.2019 were not challenged. In
fact, the petitioner had also not filed any application for
condonation of delay which had occurred in filing of the said
Original Application, however the Ld. CAT appears to have
granted liberty to the petitioner to take appropriate steps leading
to filing of a miscellaneous application bearing MA No. 489 of
2025, inter alia praying therein for amendment of the relief
sought in the original application and then the letter dated
18.04.2017, issued by the Senior Administrative Officer, Office
Patna High Court CWJC No.820 of 2026 dt.10-03-2026
8/14
of the Comptroller & Auditor General of India, New Delhi was
sought to be challenged.
9. At this juncture, it would be relevant to point out that
the petitioner had challenged the said letter dated 18.04.2017,
issued by the Senior Administrative Officer, whereby it has been
observed that the object of the Scheme for compassionate
appointment is to grant appointment on compassionate ground
to a dependent family member of a Government servant dying
in harness or who is retired on medical grounds, thereby leaving
his family in penury and without any means of livelihood, to
relieve the family of the Government servant concerned from
financial destitution and to help him get over the emergency and
in such view of the matter, it was communicated to the
Accountant General (A & E), Bihar, Patna that the competent
authority, considering the fact that four sons of deceased
Government servant are engaged in private job and only
daughter is married as also there is no liability in the family, has
agreed to the recommendation of the departmental screening
committee pertaining to the case of the petitioner to the effect
that he is not fit for appointment on compassionate ground.
10. We find from the records that the petitioner is yet to
challenge either the recommendation of the Departmental
Patna High Court CWJC No.820 of 2026 dt.10-03-2026
9/14
Screening Committee or the aforesaid orders/letters dated
20.09.2017, 05.11.2018 and 11.03.2019, nonetheless we do not
intend to go into the technicalities of the case.
11. The records would also bear it out that the petitioner
had belatedly filed one another miscellaneous application
bearing MA No. 378 of 2025, inter alia seeking condonation of
delay in filing the Original Application, however no cogent
ground has been specified therein.
12. It is not in dispute that the death of the father of the
petitioner (deceased employee) took place on 08.07.2015 and
the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate
ground was rejected by the respondents vide decision of the
Departmental Screening Committee held on 04.10.2016, which
was communicated to the mother of the petitioner/petitioner, not
once but thrice, i.e. vide letters dated 20.09.2017, 05.11.2018
and 11.03.2019, however the petitioner filed the connected
Original Application belatedly, only in the year 2025. It is a well
settled law that while exercising extraordinary and equitable
jurisdiction, the Constitutional Court, while protecting the rights
of citizens, should simultaneously keep itself alive to the
primary principle that when an aggrieved person, without
adequate reason, approaches the Court belatedly at his own
Patna High Court CWJC No.820 of 2026 dt.10-03-2026
10/14
leisure or pleasure, the writ Court is not required to grant any
indulgence to such indolent person and on the ground of delay
and laches alone, the writ Court ought to throw the petition
overboard at the very threshold. In this regard, we may gainfully
refer to various judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court
which are detailed herein below:-
“(i). Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply & Sewerage
Board & Others vs. T.T. Murali Babu, reported in
(2014) 4 SCC 108.
(ii). State of Uttaranchal & Anr. vs. Shiv Charan Singh
Bhandari & Ors., reported in 2013 AIR SCW 6627.
(iii). C. Jacob vs. Director of Geology & Mining and
Anr., reported in AIR 2009 SC 264.
(iv). State of Jammu & Kashmir vs. R.K. Zalpuri &
Others, reported in AIR 2016 SC 3006.
(v). State of Tamil Nadu vs. Seshachalam, reported in
(2007) 10 SCC 137.”
14. It is equally a well settled law that if an application on
compassionate ground is entertained after a long delay, other
cases of similar nature may arise, where grant of immediate
relief by providing employment to the dependent of the
deceased employees may crop up, hence what is material for
consideration is the time when the relief is to be granted to a
family in distress and not to reserving a job for one of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.820 of 2026 dt.10-03-2026
11/14
dependents. In this connection, it would be apt to refer to a
judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of
Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs. The State of Haryana and others,
reported in (1994) 4 SCC 138, paragraph No. 6 whereof is
reproduced herein below:-
“6. For these very reasons, the compassionate
employment cannot be granted after a lapse of a
reasonable period which must be specified in the rules.
The consideration for such employment is not a vested
right which can be exercised at any time in future. The
object being to enable the family to get over, the financial
crisis which it faces at the time of the death of the sole
breadwinner, the compassionate employment cannot be
claimed and offered whatever the lapse of time and after
the crisis is over.”
15. Thus, we find that even on merits, the petitioner is not
entitled to any relief inasmuch as compassionate appointment
cannot be granted to him after a lapse of about 11 years of the
death of his father, inasmuch as the object behind providing
appointment on compassionate ground is to enable the family to
tide over the immediate financial crisis, which it faces at the
time of death of the sole bread winner, however compassionate
employment cannot be claimed as a matter of right after lapse of
so many years, i.e 11 years in the present case, apart from the
Patna High Court CWJC No.820 of 2026 dt.10-03-2026
12/14
fact that the O.A. itself was/is barred by limitation.
16. In this regard, we would gainfully refer to yet another
judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of
Central Coalfields Ltd. v. Parden Oraon, reported in (2021) 16
SCC 384, paragraph nos. 8 & 9 whereof are reproduced herein
below:
“8. The whole object of granting compassionate
appointment is to enable the family to tide over the
sudden crisis which arises due to the death of the sole
breadwinner. The mere death of an employee in harness
does not entitle his family to such source of livelihood.
The authority concerned has to examine the financial
condition of the family of the deceased, and it is only if it
is satisfied that but for the provision of employment, the
family will not be able to meet the crisis that the job is
offered to the eligible member of the family [Umesh
Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana, (1994) 4 SCC 138 :
1994 SCC (L&S) 930]. It was further asseverated in the
said judgment that compassionate employment cannot be
granted after a lapse of reasonable period as the
consideration of such employment is not a vested right
which can be exercised at any time in the future. It was
further held that the object of compassionate
appointment is to enable the family to get over the
financial crisis that it faces at the time of the death of
sole breadwinner, compassionate appointment cannot be
claimed or offered after a significant lapse of time and
Patna High Court CWJC No.820 of 2026 dt.10-03-2026
13/14
after the crisis is over.
9. We are in agreement with the High Court that the
reasons given by the employer for denying compassionate
appointment to the respondent's son are not justified.
There is no bar in the National Coal Wage Agreement for
appointment of the son of an employee who has suffered
civil death. In addition, merely because the respondent is
working, her son cannot be denied compassionate
appointment as per the relevant clauses of the National
Coal Wage Agreement. However, the respondent's
husband is missing since 2002. Two sons of the
respondent who are the dependants of her husband as per
the records, are also shown as dependants of the
respondent. It cannot be said that there was any financial
crisis created immediately after the respondent's husband
went missing in view of the employment of the
respondent. Though the reasons given by the employer to
deny the relief sought by the respondent are not
sustainable, we are convinced that the respondent's son
cannot be given compassionate appointment at this point
of time. The application for compassionate appointment
of the son was filed by the respondent in the year 2013
which is more than 10 years after the respondent's
husband had gone missing. As the object of
compassionate appointment is for providing immediate
succour to the family of a deceased employee, the
respondent's son is not entitled for compassionate
appointment after the passage of a long period of time
since his father has gone missing.”
Patna High Court CWJC No.820 of 2026 dt.10-03-2026
14/14
17. Therefore, considering the object of the Scheme of
compassionate appointment, which is to enable the bereaved
family to tide over the immediate financial crisis which it faces
on account of sudden death of the breadwinner, no relief can be
granted to the petitioner at this juncture, inasmuch as
compassionate appointment is neither a vested right nor an
alternate mode of employment.
18. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the
case and for the foregoing reasons, we do not find any illegality
in the impugned order dated 13.08.2025 passed by the Ld. CAT
in OA No. 050/00440/2025, hence the present writ petition
stands dismissed being bereft of any merit.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Ashish/-
V.K. Pandey/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 01.04.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…