Compassionate Appointment: Madras HC Rules that Deceased Employee’s Family Pension Excluded from Family Income Assessment

LI Network

Published on: January 23, 2024 at 12:00 IST

In a recent ruling, the Madras High Court has clarified that when evaluating applications for compassionate appointments, the family pension of the deceased employee should not be considered as part of the family income.

Justice L Victoria Gowri, presiding over the case, highlighted that Government Order (G.O.) No.18 of the Labour and Employment (Q1) Department, dated 23.01.2020, explicitly states that the family pension need not be taken into account during the assessment of family income.

The Court’s attention was drawn to the specific provision in G.O. No.18, which states that if any member of the deceased government servant’s family was employed before their demise but lived separately without providing support to the family, the case of other eligible dependents would be considered. The G.O. emphasizes that the family pension of the deceased employee should be excluded from the calculation of family income.

The case, brought before the court by petitioner M. Yogamagi, involved a writ petition challenging the rejection of Yogamagi’s compassionate appointment application by the 3rd respondent on February 17, 2022. The petitioner’s mother, a Head Mistress in a Panchayat Union Middle School, passed away on December 19, 2018.

The Court, after careful examination, found that the rejection of Yogamagi’s application was not properly justified. It opined that the petitioner’s case should have been appropriately considered by the 3rd respondent, and due diligence was lacking in the process.

In response to the rejection, it was argued on behalf of the respondents that the petitioner’s family was receiving a monthly pension of Rs.35,150 after the mother’s death, and the petitioner’s father was earning a substantial salary. However, the court disagreed, stating that the petitioner’s application had not been properly appreciated.

As a result, the High Court directed the 3rd respondent to provide a suitable job to the petitioner under compassionate grounds within a timeframe of 12 weeks.

The case bears the title “M Yogamagi vs The Secretary to the Government, Department of School Education & Ors.”

Related Post