Smt. Bhuvaneshwari N vs Union Of India & Ors.

“(A)

Quash the Office of the Inspector Post Krishnarajanagar-571602, letter No: IP/GDS dlgs, dated 12.09.2025, vide Annexure A-07. And letter no IP/GDS/dlgs dated-31.10.2025 vide Annexure A-18. Issued by Respondent No-05.

(B)

consequently, direct the respondents to reinstate the applicant with all consequential benefits.”

“5(a). The applicant is a widow and applied for Compassionate appointment, after the death of her husband on 27.05.2021. The DG Posts letter 17-85/93 ED & Trg dated-2 Feb 1994, clarifies that "However in conformity with the spirit of orders of Dept of Personnel & Training, the relaxation would be available only to the widow/widower of the deceased ED Agent that too only for appointment against such category of ED Posts, for which the prescribed minimum Educational Qualification is that of group 'D' ie middle class pass. The claimant widows/widower should however at least be a literate in cases where the Minimum Educational Qualification is relaxed in his/her favor." Therefore, with regard to Educational Qualification for engagement of applicant the above classification only will be applicable and further the applicant passed in SSLC exam during 2022, and produced to the Dept. Therefore, the insistence of again and again to produce the SSLC Marks Card for verification, and threatening failure to face termination from service is with malafide intentions with arbitrary power.

5(b). The applicant submits that the O/o Sr Supdt of Post Offices letter dated-27.10.2022, and IP KR Nagar letter dated-19.09.2024, and CCE letter dated-18/22.08.2022, all refer Directorate letter dated-30.05.2017 regarding educational qualification for appointment of GDS Posts. The above letter dated-30.05.2017, para 9(b) stipulates as "request received after one year from date of death of the GDS will be considered as belated requests" This condition will not applicable to the applicants Case Para 9(b) does not stipulate anything regarding Educational Qualification.

5(c). The applicant submits that the Dept of Post Gramin Dak sevaks Conduct & Engagement rules 2020, rule 3'b' eligibility Criteria for engagement of Gramin Dak Sevak posts, for Direct recruitment, rule 3B(ii) regarding Educational Qualification 11(i) prescribes as "Secondary School Examination Pass Certificate of 10^th std with passing Marks in Mathematics and English (having been studied as compulsory or elective subjects) Conducted by any recognized board of School Education of the Govt of India/State Govts/union territories in India shall be a Mandatory Educational Qualification for all approved categories of Gramin Dak Sevaks, as prescribed from time to time. The applicant submits that the condition that the mathematics, as one of the subjects in SSLC for eligibility was not prescribed in Directorate letter dated – 30.05.2017, which was mentioned in all the letters of engagement order. Therefore, the insistence of Mathematics pass in SSLC Mark Card, is against the Directorate letter dated. 30.05.2017.

5(d). The applicant further submits that the LP KR Nagar sub-Div letter dated. 10.11.2023, the engagement order, which stipulates as "should clearly understand that his/her engagement shall be governed by dept of Posts, Gramin Dak Conduct & engagement rules 2022 as amended from time to time. The applicant submits there is no rules called Dept of Posts Gramin Dak Sevak (conduct and engagement rules 2022). Such Rule is not existing.

5(e). The applicant submits that the DOPT issued OM dated-05.09.2016, regarding consolidated instructions on compassionate appointment in frequently asked questions, question no 35, it was clarified as "A person who does not fulfill educational qualification of a Post can be appointed as "Trainee" DOPT OM F.No. 14014/02/2012-Estt. (D) dated 11.02.2009 and 03.04.2012.

5(f). The applicant submits that the DOPT orders on compassionate appointment updated on 02.08.2022, in part 'B' relaxation (b) stipulates as" In exceptional circumstances Govt may consider persons not immediate by meeting the minimum educational standards, Govt may engage them as trainees” and para (d) stipulates as “in case of appointment of a widow, not fulfilling the required educational qualification against Post of Multi-Tasking Staff, she will be placed in minimum Pay level-I directly without insisting on fulfillment of educational norms, provided that the appointing authority is satisfied that duties of the Post against which she is being appointed can be performed, without SSLC Mathematics requirement. Therefore, insisting SSLC marks card which Mathematics pass, is without any logic or rationale.

5(g). The applicant submits that the family was in indigence condition, the applicant submits that there is no other person in family, who is earning. Her husband was a GDS employee, who is not having any retiral benefits nor pension. She is having a mentally retorted son, who is entirely depend on her to again appear for SSLC Examination, and secure SSLC marks with Mathematics as one of the subjects. The termination from engagement is causing disaster in her life and family.

5(h). The applicant submits that she has studied Math's as one of the subjects in 8^th standard, and 9^th standard, and passes the SSLC pass certificate, as per qualification prescribed and such qualification is enough to perform the duties of a mail carrier. Therefore, insisting the SSLC marks card, with math's as one of the subjects is arbitrary, illegal, and in violation of directorate order and DOPT OMs regarding Compassionate appointment. Hence the OA.”

“The applicant husband Sri M.R. Ganesha Murthy expired on 27.05.2021. The applicant submitted an application for compassionate appointment. The Review Committee on Compassionate engagement (CCE) which met on 29.07.2022 & 10.08.2022, and Recommended/Approved the applicant for any GDS Post. The applicant was appointed as GDS MC at Hampapura SO, on regular basis from 01.11.2022 vide order dated-10.11.2023. The applicant obtained SSLC qualification vide Certificate 02421, issued by Karnataka Secondary Education Examination Board dated-12.08.2022. The applicant submitted the SSLC Marks Card therefore she was appointed as GDS MC from 01.11.2022. The Respondents now insists that she should submit SSLC Certificate with Mathematics as one of the subjects, as per, Postal Directorate letter no 17-01/2017-GDS dated-09.02.2022, the applicant submits that she has studied mathematics in 8^th and 9^th std insisting Mathematics as one of the subjects in SSLC, is against the principal laid down, by DOPT for Compassionate Appointment Scheme. The DOPT OM No. 14014/2/2009-Estt(D) dated. 03.04.2012, stipulates in case of appointment of a widow, the educational qualification, should be relaxed. The applicant passed in SSLC examination during April 2022, but she not studied Mathematics as one of the subjects not studying Math's in SSLC can't be a factor for making ineligible for GDS appointment on Compassionate ground. The Scheme of Compassionate appoints, provides for relaxation/Exemption with regard to educational qualification, The GDS Conduct and engagement rules 2020, rule 3(B) eligibility criteria for engagement to GDS post, rule 3(B) II(i) which prescribes educational qualification, as 1. Secondary School Examination Pass Certificate of 10^th std with Passing marks in Mathematics and English, is only for applicants for Direct recruitment/Appointment not for compassionate appointments. Therefore, termination on the plea that applicant not passed in maths is arbitrary, illegal and against the Postal Directorate orders and against the Principles/Norms laid down by DOPT. Hence the OA.”

“With reference to the above subject you were directed to produce marks card on acquiring the minimum prescribed qualification within 3 years as per provisio of Directorate letter No. 17-1/2017-GDS dated 30.05.2017 Para no. 9(b), but till date you have not submitted any document to this office. Hence you are hereby directed to produce marks card on acquiring the minimum prescribed qualification within 3 years i.e within 3 years from 01.11.2022. Failure to produce the same will be liable to terminate your engagement as per Rule 8 of GDS Conduct and Engagement Rules 2020.”

“Applicant for compassionate appointment should be eligible and suitable for the post in all respects as per the conditions prescribed for normal regular selection to the GDS post for which being considered. “ Further in para 6 B(b) it mentions that:

“There shall be no relaxation in basic education qualifications prescribed for the GDS post for which the applicant is being considered.”

(i)

Secondary School Examination pass 10 standard with passing marks in Mathematics and English (having been studied as compulsory or elective subjects) conducted by any recognized Board of School Education of the Government of India/State Governments/ Union Territories in India shall be a mandatory educational qualification for all approved categories of Gramin Dak Sevaks (ie. BPM, ABPM & Dak Sevak) as prescribed from time to time.”

“Authority competent to take a final decision for making compassionate appointment in a case shall be competent to grant relaxation of upper age limit also for making such appointment.”

“In exceptional circumstances Government may consider recruiting persons not immediately meeting the minimum educational standards. Government may engage them as trainees who will be given the regular pay bands and grade pay only on acquiring the minimum qualification prescribed under the recruitment rules. The emoluments of these trainees, during the period of their training and before they are absorbed in the Government as employees, will be equal to the lowest/first cell (minimum) of Pay level 1.”

“In case of appointment of a widow not fulfilling the requirement of educational qualification, against the post of MULTI TASKING STAFF, she will be placed in minimum of Pay Level-1, directly without insisting on fulfillment of educational qualification norms, provided the appointing authority is satisfied that the duties of the post against which She is being appointed can be performed with help of some on job training This dispensation is to be allowed for appointment on compassionate ground against the post of MULTI TASKING STAFF only.”

“6.

However, it merits emphasis that as per Clause 6.5 of the above-mentioned Government Memorandum dated 29th September 2014, an appointment to the post of Assistant Grade-III was conditional, as the concerned candidate had to clear the Computer Proficiency Certification Test (CPCT) within three years of joining service, The afore-mentioned Clause 6.5 is reproduced hereunder:

"6.5

For the grant of compassionate appointment to the dependent of Government Servant on the post of Assistant Grade-3, 3 years’ time will be given for passing Computer Diploma and Computer Typing Certificate Exam from the recognized institute. In case of not passing the required exams within the prescribed period of 3 years, in view of the attempts of passing exams by the concerned employee and the typing eligibility as acquired by him, period of 1 year may he further extended by the Appointing Authority. In case of not passing the required exams by the concerned employee even after the expiry of this period, his services could be terminated.”

“8.

The dispute arose when notwithstanding the expiry of the stipulated three-year period under Condition No. 15, and in spite of grant of an additional one-year extension from 15th September 2023 to 14th September 2024, the Respondent no. 1 failed to obtain and submit the requisite CPCT scorecard, culminating in the termination of his services vide order dated 30th September 2024 issued by the appointing authority.”

“9.

Aggrieved thereby, the Respondent no. 1 filed a Writ Petition, being No. 36207 of 2024, before the High Court seeking quashing and setting aside of his termination order and restoration of his service in the department. The Single Bench of the High Court while refraining from setting aside the termination order and emphasising the underlying welfare purpose of compassionate appointment, directed the competent authorities to sympathetically consider the case of the Respondent no. 1 for appointment to a lower post (Class-IV) in which CPCT qualification is not mandatory, subject to expressing his willingness to serve in such post. It is this direction, affirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court that forms the subject matter of challenge in the present appeal.”

“10.

Before embarking upon the merits of the case, it is apposite at this juncture to highlight the underlying principles of compassionate appointments, as this Court cannot remain oblivious to the human realities that animate disputes of this nature. It is a harsh reality that the sudden loss of a breadwinner does not merely extinguish a life; it often disrupts the economic stability of the entire household.”

“11.

In families where a deceased stood as the only source of sustenance, death carries with it not only emotional devastation but the looming threat of deprivation, insecurity and social marginalisation. A welfare State, committed to the Constitutional ideals of justice with the mandate of reducing inequality, promoting social justice and ensuring a basic standard of living for all, cannot afford to allow such bereaved families to slide into destitution by the mechanical operation of procedural formalities. Significantly, a responsibility has been cast upon the State under the provisions of Part IV of the Constitution of India, i.e., Article 39 of the Directive Principles of State Policy to serve such a welfare State. Thus, the policy of compassionate appointment is not a concession, largesse or mercy shown to hapless dependents of a deceased employee, but a structured response of the State to ensure that the death of an employee does not mark the beginning of economic calamity for those left behind. It is from this vantage point that the competing claims in the present appeal must be examined.”

“12.

This Court has in numerous occasions elucidated the underlying humanitarian purpose of compassionate appointment. The principle was articulated lucidly in Haryana State Electricity Board v. Hakim Singh1, wherein this Court observed as follows:

"8.

The rule of appointments to public service is that they should be on merits and through open invitation. It is the normal route through which one can get into a public employment. However, as every rule can have exceptions, there are a few exceptions to the said rule also which have been evolved to meet certain contingencies. As per one such exception relief is provided to the bereaved family of a deceased employee by accommodating one of his dependants in a vacancy. The object is to give succour to the family which has been suddenly plunged into penury due to the untimely death of its sole breadwinner. This Court has observed time and again that the object of providing such ameliorating relief should not be taken as opening an alternative mode of recruitment to public employment."”

“17.

It can be safely concluded that a narrow or mechanical construction of the rules governing compassionate appointment cannot be permitted to override the welfare-oriented purpose of the scheme. Where a procedural rigidity ceases to advance the humanitarian intent of the policy and instead operates as an obstacle to its effective implementation, such a procedure must be construed liberally to ensure that justice is not sacrificed at the altar of technicality. In this context, it is apposite to recall the sagacious observations of V. R. Krishna Iyer, J. in Sushil Kumar Sen vs. State of Bihar6:

"Justice is the goal of jurisprudence processual, as much as substantive. While this appeal has to be allowed, .., I must sound a pessimistic note that it is too puritanical for a legal system to sacrifice the end product of equity and good conscience at the altar of processual punctiliousness and it is not too radical to avert a breakdown of obvious justice by bending sharply, if need be, the prescriptions of procedure. The wages of procedural sin should never be the death of rights."”

“18.

In this background, it is incumbent upon both the concerned government departments and the Courts to adopt a humane and purposive approach, ensuring that the spirit of the scheme prevails over strict or pedantic readings of its procedural stipulations. Procedures and technicalities in welfare schemes are meant to provide structure, not to become cracks through which the most vulnerable slip. When interpretation widens those cracks instead of narrowing them, the wall ceases to protect and begins to endanger.”

ORDER