IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH CWP No. 7333 of 2010 Date of decision April 26 , 2010 Malkiat Singh ....... Petitioner Versus Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh and others ........ Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- Mr. Ram Pal Rana, Advocate for the petitioner. **** K. Kannan, J (oral). 1. The writ petition has been filed for quashing the order passed on 4.8.2009 when the petitioner's name was removed from the list of persons who were entitled to consideration for compassionate appointment. By the impugned proceedings, the policy of compassionate appointment was applied to be effective only to persons whose candidature was to be considered within three years from the time of death of an employee dying in harness. 2. It is a well known proposition that compassionate appointment itself is deviation from Article 14 and therefore, it has to be construed strictly. Compassionate appointment again is to give a relief from financial distress to the family which had unexpected lost its bread winner and inevitably a claimant's appointment shall be within a short time from the date of death. The fact that the petitioner had made a claim for compassionate appointment immediately after the death will not avail to him a right unless the other terms of the scheme providing for the appointment are also fulfilled. If within a period of three years a vacancy did not arise to which post a person who is otherwise eligible for consideration should have been appointed, it will be perfectly justified for the policy makers to exclude such persons from consideration. In this case, in a seniority list which is maintained by the respective establishments, there is a provision for systematic weeding out of the candidates after a period of three years. On the completion of three years, if a vacancy did not arise to which an employee could be provided with employment the said policy could be said to be even reasonable for it is a method to make the scheme work. It cannot avail to any one's benefit to keep a list of eligible candidates for an indefinite period. The proper monitoring of a system of appointment under a scheme has to be viable. It would inevitably mean capping the vacancies available for compassionate appointment for a particular period for a particular percentage which shall belong to the realm of policy makers. If the petitioner could not be considered for appointment under the scheme, to retain such a person in the seniority list will be meaningless. The impugned order does not suffer from any legal vice for intervention in the writ petition. 3. The writ petition is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE April 26, 2010 archana