The Karnataka High Court ruled on Thursday, September 14, that a sister cannot be hired on compassionate grounds after her married brother died while working as a Junior Line Man for Bangalore Electricity Supply Company (BESCOM).
The court bench, comprising Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit, indicated that the ‘family’ of the deceased married man includes his wife and children who are dependent upon him and who stay with him.
While hearing the petition filed by Pallavi G M, a 29-year-old resident of Tumakuru, the court referred to Rule 2(1)(b) of the Karnataka Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 1996.
As per the said rule, the definition of “family” includes “(i) in the case of the deceased male married Government Servant, his widow, son and daughter (unmarried/married/divorced/widowed) who were dependent upon him and living with him.”
According to the court, it has long been established that only a member of the deceased employee’s family can submit a claim for appointment on compassionate grounds, that too only by showing evidence of dependency on the employee who died.
“A sister does not figure in the definition, is obvious. The appellant being a sister cannot be construed as a member of the family of the deceased. These Rules are adopted and followed by the respondent-KPTCL and the respondent-BESCOM who happen to be the Government Companies as defined u/s 617 of the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956 and section 2(45) of the Companies Act, 2013,” it added.
Pallavi had appealed the March 30, 2023 ruling of a single judge bench that had dismissed her petition for compassionate appointment. Her brother had died on duty while working for BESCOM, the state power transmission firm.
Her attorney contended that because she was reliant on her brother, she was a member of his family and thus qualified for appointment on compassionate grounds.
However, the counsel for BESCOM argued that in the case of public employment, the compassionate appointment is an exception to the rule of equality. “The scheme providing for the same needs to be strictly construed. If so construed, the appellant who is admittedly a sister of the deceased employee is not entitled to any compassionate appointment,” the counsel said.
The court then said that there was no evidence to show that the sister was dependent on her brother at the time of his death. “The above apart, absolutely no material is placed on record by the appellant to show that she was dependent on the income of her brother at the time of his death in harness nor there is any material to assume that the family of the deceased is in financial distress as would justify the claim for appointment on compassionate grounds,” the Court said.
The appeal was dismissed.
