The Calcutta High Court has quashed a West Bengal government decision that rejected a man’s compassionate appointment plea on grounds of a four-year delay, ruling that an applicant cannot be penalised for the state’s prolonged inaction.
Presiding over the case, Justice Reetobroto Kumar Mitra on September 8 directed the concerned authorities to re-examine the claim of the petitioner, Lakshman Dome, on its merits without enforcing time-bar restrictions.
Administrative Inaction and Family Tragedy
The matter stems from the death of Dome’s father, a West Bengal state employee, on September 28, 2020. Seeking relief for the household, the employee’s widow nominated her younger son for compassionate appointment in December 2020.
Government officials, however, kept the younger son’s file pending for over three and a half years without making a decision. During this period of administrative delay, the younger brother died in September 2023.
Following his brother’s death, Dome, the elder son, stepped forward to submit a fresh application for compassionate employment. A subsequent departmental inquiry completed in July 2024 confirmed that he was fully qualified to undertake the job.
Unfair Application of Time Limits
Despite the inquiry clearance, the authorities summarily dismissed Dome’s request on December 5, 2024. The administration cited a four-year gap since his father’s demise, maintaining that the application could no longer be entertained due to the lapse of time. Dome challenged this decision before the High Court.
Justice Mitra rejected the government’s stance, holding that dismissing the claim strictly on the calendar timeline was unfair and arbitrary. The bench observed that Dome could not have applied earlier while his younger brother was alive and awaiting a decision.
The court held that the delay between December 2020 and September 2023 was caused entirely by administrative inertia, meaning the state could not turn its own inaction into a ground to disqualify the elder brother.
Upholding Dignity for Bereaved Families
Addressing the delay, Justice Mitra rebuked the administration for demonstrating profound apathy, observing that keeping an application unresolved for years completely defeats the core objective of compassionate employment: ensuring that a deceased employee’s family can survive with dignity.
The court noted that the state’s inaction had contributed significantly to the family’s plight, highlighting that the younger son had died while his application was still pending.
Because the rejection order rested entirely on an alleged delay rather than Dome’s eligibility, the High Court instructed the state government to conduct a fresh assessment of his application strictly on its merits.
