भारत संघ बनाम एस.के. सिन्हा
| Citation | (2001) 4 SCC 228 |
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Date | 16 March 2001 |
| Year | 2001 |
| Bench | R.C. Lahoti, Shivaraj V. Patil JJ. |
| Acts/Articles | Article 14, Article 16 |
| Category | Service & Employment Law |
Key Principle Established
Compassionate appointment is not a vested right but a concession. It must be made only to meet the immediate financial crisis of the bereaved family. Delay of several years defeats the purpose.
Claims for compassionate appointment were made years after the death of the government servant. The question was whether there is any time limit for seeking compassionate appointment.
The Court held that compassionate appointment is not a right but a concession meant to tide over the immediate financial crisis caused by the death of the breadwinner. If several years have elapsed, the purpose is defeated and the claim becomes stale. The family must apply within a reasonable time.
This judgment clarified the legal nature and time-bound nature of compassionate appointments, preventing misuse of this provision.
2014 SCC OnLine P&H 22487
Government policy on regularization of contractual employees under HKRNL must be implemented uniformly. Selective application violates Article 14.
Read Analysis(1993) 2 SCC 411
Recruitment bodies must follow fair and transparent selection processes. Any irregularity in the recruitment process vitiates the entire selection.
Read Analysis(1982) 1 SCC 618
Equal pay for equal work is a constitutional goal derivable from Articles 14, 16, and 39(d) read together.
Read AnalysisThis judgment summary is for educational and research purposes. While care has been taken to accurately represent the ratio and findings, for authoritative reference always consult the original judgment text from official sources (SCC Online, AIR, Manupatra, or court websites).
22+ years of practice before Punjab & Haryana High Court and Supreme Court of India.