Denial Of Compassionate Appointment On Ground Of Widow’s Remarriage Is Travesty Of Justice: Kerala High Court Allows Plea

The Kerala High Court has allowed a Writ Petition filed by a woman who was denied compassionate appointment on the ground of remarriage after her husband’s demise.

The Petition sought direction to the State authorities to appoint the aggrieved woman in the existing vacancy of Office Attendant in a school or any other appropriate post within a time fixed by the Court.

A Single Bench of Justice N. Nagaresh held, “Compassionate appointment was not given to the petitioner immediately after the demise of her husband, perhaps because of non-availability of suitable vacancy. After one year, the petitioner got remarried. A remarriage in such circumstances cannot take away the statutory right vested with the petitioner. If the petitioner is declined compassionate appointment in such circumstances, it would be a travesty of justice.”

The Bench emphasised that the right of dependents of a deceased Aided School Teacher is a vested right.

Advocate C.P. Peethambaran represented the Petitioner, while Government Pleader Anima M. and Advocate Murali Pallath represented the Respondents.

Brief Facts

The Petitioner’s husband was working as High School Assistant (Social Studies) in the Respondent school. He passed away in the year 2017 while in service. The Petitioner was his legally wedded wife and they had no children in their wedlock. She was dependent on the deceased husband and hence, she applied for compassionate appointment in the prescribed form in 2017. The Manager of school acknowledged the application and stated that as on that date, there was no suitable vacancy to accommodate the Petitioner. It was assured that her request will be considered as and when vacancy arises. The Petitioner stated that she had passed SSLC, her father passed away long ago, and she had no brothers.

Her mother was aged and there was nobody to look after her upon the death of her husband. Therefore, she remarried in 2018 and thereafter, she was not getting family pension. In 2024, a vacancy of Office Attendant arose in the school and the Petitioner against submitted an application. As the matter was dragging, she submitted a representation to the District Educational Officer (DEO). The Director General of Education (DGE) informed DEO that remarriage is not a bar for getting compassionate appointment. Subsequently, the Manager issued a letter stating that since the Petitioner has remarried, she is not eligible for compassionate appointment. Being aggrieved, she approached the High Court.

Reasoning

The High Court in view of the above facts, observed, “… in the case of the petitioner, the petitioner's husband was not a government employee. The petitioner's husband was a Teacher in a Government Aided School governed by the Kerala Education Act and the Rules. The petitioner's claim for compassionate appointment arises from a statutory provision. As far as staff of Government Aided Schools are concerned, compassionate appointment to dependents of deceased Aided School employees, is a valuable statutory right.”

The Court noted that grant of employment to dependent of an Aided School Teacher dying in harness is a mandatory statutory requirement.

“The petitioner was the only daughter of her parents. The petitioner's father had passed away. The petitioner had to take care of her aged mother. The petitioner thought that in the prevailing Society, a widow cannot lead a peaceful life without a male support, especially when there is an aged mother to look after. The petitioner therefore remarried after one year of the demise of her husband”, it remarked.

The Court reiterated that marriage by itself does not disqualify the person concerned from seeking a compassionate appointment.

“While in the case of government servants, the claim for compassionate appointment is based on executive instructions issued and amended by the Government from time to time, as far as Teachers in the Aided Schools in Kerala are concerned, compassionate appointment is a valuable statutory right. The language of Rule 51B does not give rise to any doubt that the Manager of an Aided School “shall give employment to a dependent of an Aided School Teacher dying in harness”, it said.

The Court further observed that it is true that the Government Orders relating to employment assistance to the dependents of government servants dying in harness shall mutatis mutandis, apply in the matter of such appointments but, going by the language of the Rule, such Government Orders cannot be applied in a manner to defeat the very conferment of right under Rule 51B Chapter XIVA KER.

“The respondents are directed to appoint the petitioner in the existing or next arising vacancy in the School”, it directed.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Writ Petition and set aside the impugned order.

Cause Title- Mini R.K. v. State of Kerala & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:KER:85653)

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocates C.P. Peethambaran, Karthika Peethambaran, Neeraja Venugopal, Arjun J Das, and Divya Varghese.

Respondents: Government Pleader Anima M. and Advocate Murali Pallath.

Click here to read/download the Judgment