The relief sought for in the present writ petition was for a direction to the third respondent to appoint the petitioner to the post of Junior Assistant on compassionate grounds. The writ petitioner states that the father of the writ petitioner was working as Gang Mazdoor in Srivilliputhur Municipality and died on 04.03.2004, while he was in service. During the relevant point of time when the father of writ petitioner passed away, the mother of the writ petitioner was working as Sweeper in the Srivilliputhur Municipality. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner states that in view of the fact that the family was in indigent circumstances, he made an application for appointment on compassionate ground. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents states that even at the time of death of the employee, his wife viz., mother of the writ petitioner was an employee of the Srivilliputhur Municipality and this apart, the writ petitioner has got married and living separately. This being the facts and circumstances, the scheme of compassionate appointment cannot be granted in favour of the writ petitioner.
Compassionate appointment is a consession and the same concession cannot be claimed as a matter of right. Thus, the special scheme is to be implemented strictly in accordance with the rules. Violation in any form in respect of the terms and conditions of the scheme of compassionate appointment is to be viewed seriously. Compassionate appointment being a special scheme is in violation of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Thus, the constitutional right of equal opportunity is denied in the event of extending the scope of compassionate appointment.
.The Madras High Court is of the considered opinion that the family of the writ petitioner cannot be construed as one in indigent circumstances and thus, not considering the name of the writ petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground, is in accordance with the terms and conditions and there is no infirmity. The Court held that a compassionate appointment scheme is a non-statutory scheme and is in the form of a concession and it cannot be claimed as a matter of right by the claimant to be enforced through a writ proceeding.