VIJAYAWADA: The Andhra Pradesh High Court has expressed its serious concern over the growing number of compassionate appointments in the State, noting that 20,801 such jobs were given from 2014, which averages nearly 2,000 appointments every year exceeding the State’s regular annual recruitment.
The Court observed that indiscriminate compassionate appointments are harming the rights of unemployed youth. It clarified that compassionate appointment is not a right but only an exception to help the family of a deceased employee facing distress. It pointed out that beneficiarie.
Compassionate appointments should be considered only when the family of an employee who died in service is in extreme poverty, the Court said. Many talented youth have been waiting years for government jobs, but unchecked compassionate appointments are crushing their hopes. While the government shows excessive sympathy to families of deceased employees, it acts harshly toward unemployed youth, the bench remarked.
In this context, the Court directed the State government to frame fresh guidelines within three months. The guidelines must clearly cover the family’s financial status, payment of ex-gratia instead of jobs, and providing employment on temporary or outsourcing basis rather than permanent posts through compassionate grounds.
While hearing the petition of Sujana who approached the court seeking directions for a job under compassionate grounds, Justice Nyapathi Vijay delivered the verdict and directed the Registry to send a copy to the Chief Secretary, General Administration Department.
Govt must aim for greatest good for the greatest number: HC
Sujana is married daughter of Pendalayya, a library assistant from Pennepalli village, Pellakuru mandal, Tirupati district, who died in service.
During the hearing, Justice Vijay sought details from GAD on how many persons were appointed on compassionate grounds across departments, corporations, and societies. The data showed 20,801 appointments since State bifurcation in 2014. “Looking at these figures, granting exceptions in the name of compassion has become routine. Compassionate appointments are meant to pull an employee’s family out of financial difficulty and must be used only in exceptional cases,” Justice Vijay noted.
He further added that government jobs must ensure equal opportunity for all, but compassionate appointments bypass this.
“The State and public sector bodies are taking away the fundamental rights of unemployed youth to equal opportunity in the name of compassion,” he observed.
The court also mentioned the plight of many unemployed persons who face severe economic hardship with not a single government job in their families, and have suffered heartbreaking events too. Unlike claimants of compassionate posts, they have no platform to voice their grievances. “There are lakhs of jobless families facing greater financial distress than those of deceased employees,” the order said.
“Compassionate appointments consider only eligibility, not performance or merit. The manner of appointments shows the recruitment process is being misused under the cover of sympathy,” the judge observed, adding that strict norms are needed to decide dependency.
The 2017 GO 114 on ex-gratia does not match the rising cost of living over the years. Ex-gratia should be fixed based on the deceased employee’s last drawn salary and remaining service, the Court held.
If giving a job to an eligible family member is unavoidable, it should be on an outsourcing or temporary basis instead of a permanent post. Permanent compassionate appointments should be only in special, exceptional cases, at the State’s discretion.
“These observations may seem harsh, but public welfare is paramount in government recruitment.
The highest aim of governments is the welfare of the people, the greatest good for the greatest number. The government machinery must work toward these goals,” Justice Vijay concluded.