Tinku Vs State of Haryana & Ors. (Supreme Court of India)
Supreme Court held that compassionate appointment is not a vested right thus rejection of claim justified since appellant attained majority 11 years after the unfortunate death of his father.
Facts- This Appeal has been preferred by the son of Shri Jai Prakash, a deceased constable in Haryana Police, seeking appointment on compassionate grounds, as his father and another constable died while on duty on 22.11.1997. The Appellant then was seven years of age, and the policy which was in force was dated 08.05.1995 which provided for ex-gratia appointment confined to Class III and IV posts. The widow of Balwan Singh, the other police constable, who died along with the father of the Appellant, was granted compassionate appointment as a constable upon her application.
Conclusion- The purpose, therefore, of such policies is to give immediate succour to the family. When seen in this conspectus, three years as has been laid down from the date of death of the employee for putting forth a claim by a dependant, which, includes attainment of majority as per the 1999 policy instructions issued by the Government of Haryana cannot be said to be in any case unjustified or illogical, especially when compassionate appointment is not a vested right.
