TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court rules on compassionate appointment criteria, emphasizing causal connection</h1> <h3>Steel Authority of India Ltd. Versus Madhusudan Das and Ors.</h3> The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's decision, ruling that the death of Bhagirathi Das did not meet the criteria for a compassionate appointment ... - Issues Involved:1. Interpretation of terms of a tripartite settlement regarding appointment on compassionate grounds.2. Whether the death of Bhagirathi Das was due to an accident arising out of and in the course of employment.3. The legal principles governing compassionate appointments.Summary:Issue 1: Interpretation of Terms of Tripartite SettlementThe appeal questions the interpretation of the terms of a tripartite settlement providing for appointment on compassionate grounds, arising from a judgment by the High Court of Jharkhand. The settlement, specifically Para 8.9.4, stipulates that employment to a direct dependant is provided only in cases of death due to an accident arising out of and in the course of employment.Issue 2: Death of Bhagirathi DasBhagirathi Das, an employee of Gua Ores Mines, collapsed and died while on duty. The respondent, his son, sought compassionate appointment, which was initially rejected. The Division Bench of the High Court allowed the appeal, holding that the death occurred during employment, thus entitling the respondent to compassionate appointment. However, the Supreme Court noted that the post-mortem report did not indicate death due to an accident. The Court emphasized that the writ petition did not suggest that the death was a result of an accident or hazardous work conditions. The Division Bench's conclusion that the death occurred during employment was insufficient to meet the criteria of an accident as defined in the settlement.Issue 3: Legal Principles Governing Compassionate AppointmentsThe Supreme Court reiterated that compassionate appointments are not a right but a concession, governed by specific rules and conditions. The criteria for such appointments include the death of the sole breadwinner, which must be established as arising out of and in the course of employment. The Court cited several precedents, including *General Manager, State Bank of India v. Anju Jain* and *Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana*, emphasizing that compassionate appointments are exceptions to the general rule of merit-based recruitment and are intended to provide immediate relief to the deceased employee's family. The Court also clarified the meaning of 'accident' in the context of employment, requiring a causal connection between the accident and the employment.Conclusion:The Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgment, concluding that the conditions for compassionate appointment were not met as the death of Bhagirathi Das did not occur due to an accident arising out of and in the course of employment. The appeal was allowed, with no order as to costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
