https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197504 Compassionate appointment under the applicable Railway Board scheme could not be denied to the ward of a medically decategorised employee where the record did not show that alternative employment had been offered in accordance with the governing policy. The employee's retirement was treated as arising from the standing committee's recommendation, and the respondents failed to prove a voluntary retirement after refusal of suitable alternative service. In those circumstances, the later restrictive circular dated 29 November 2001 could not override the earlier circular dated 22 September 1995, which governed the claim. The rejection of compassionate appointment was therefore unsustainable, and the appellant was entitled to appointment. en-us Fri, 11 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Jan 2018 10:39:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197504 Compassionate appointment under the applicable Railway Board scheme could not be denied to the ward of a medically decategorised employee where the record did not show that alternative employment had been offered in accordance with the governing policy. The employee's retirement was treated as arising from the standing committee's recommendation, and the respondents failed to prove a voluntary retirement after refusal of suitable alternative service. In those circumstances, the later restrictive circular dated 29 November 2001 could not override the earlier circular dated 22 September 1995, which governed the claim. The rejection of compassionate appointment was therefore unsustainable, and the appellant was entitled to appointment. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 11 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197504