Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Service & Administrative LawSupreme Court of India

Chief Engineer (Naval Works) v. A.P. Asha

Civil Appeal · Neutral citation not assigned (Civil Appeal No. 5353 of 2009)Decided 15 Oct 2015
Civil Appeal No. 5353 of 2009
Justice Anil R. Dave · Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel

Background

The respondent's husband, an employee of the Naval Works department, died in harness in 1999. She asked for a job on compassionate grounds, and her case was considered and rejected three times because more needy claimants were appointed under the employer's policy. The Central Administrative Tribunal then directed the employer to consider her case again, and the High Court upheld that order.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and allowed the employer's appeal, with no order as to costs. The Court held that a dependant has no right to compassionate appointment when someone more needy is available under the policy. Because the claim had already been considered and rejected on the policy, the Tribunal was wrong to keep directing fresh consideration. The Court also held that the High Court erred in upholding that repeated direction.

Lesson Learnt

Compassionate appointment is a policy-based relief, not an automatic right, and a family's claim can be weighed against other needier families. Once a claim has been properly considered under the policy, a court is unlikely to keep ordering it reconsidered.

Chief Engineer (Naval Works) v. A.P. Asha – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware