Supreme Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court, on December 2, 2024, declined to interfere with the Kerala High Court’s ruling that set aside the compassionate appointment of R. Prasanth, son of late CPI(M) MLA K.K. Ramachandran Nair, in Kerala’s Public Works Department (PWD). The apex court held that compassionate appointments under the Kerala State & Subordinate Service Rules (KS & SSR) are limited to dependents of government servants and cannot extend to MLAs or others outside the prescribed policy.
While dismissing the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by Prasanth, the Court allowed him to retain the salary earned during his tenure and noted that no recovery would be made against him. The bench, comprising CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar, observed that the government’s action in invoking Rule 39 of KS & SSR to create a supernumerary post for Prasanth was unjustified and violated principles of fairness and equality enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
Background of the Case
Prasanth’s Appointment: After the death of his father, a first-time MLA, in 2018, R. Prasanth was appointed as Assistant Engineer (Electric) in the PWD under compassionate grounds. This was facilitated by invoking Rule 39 of KS & SSR, which allows discretionary appointments by the government in “just and equitable” circumstances.
Challenge: The appointment was challenged in the Kerala High Court, which ruled that such appointments are limited to the dependents of government employees who die in service, as per the state’s compassionate appointment scheme. It also observed that creating a supernumerary post for Prasanth was beyond the scope of Rule 39 and violated constitutional principles.
Kerala High Court’s Observations
- Limitations of Compassionate Employment:
Appointments under the compassionate employment scheme are strictly for dependents of government employees who die while in service.
MLAs, being elected representatives and not government servants, do not fall within the ambit of the policy.
- Improper Use of Rule 39:
Rule 39 of KS & SSR, which permits discretionary appointments in “just and equitable” circumstances, cannot be used arbitrarily.
The phrase “just and equitable” is qualified by fairness, transparency, and adherence to constitutional guarantees, particularly Articles 14 (equality before the law) and 16 (equality of opportunity in public employment).
- Creation of Supernumerary Post:
The Kerala Financial Code specifies strict conditions for creating supernumerary posts, such as accommodating officers with lien on permanent posts.
The post created for Prasanth was found to be irregular and a deviation from established norms.
- Public Interest:
Any appointment under Rule 39 must align with public interest and fairness, ensuring that no individual or family is favored based solely on political or personal considerations.
Supreme Court’s Observations
The Court affirmed the Kerala High Court’s reasoning, reiterating that compassionate appointments are designed to alleviate financial hardships of dependents of deceased government employees, not elected representatives.
Discretionary Power: While Rule 39 grants discretionary power to the state, it cannot override constitutional principles or established guidelines. Arbitrary use of such power undermines the integrity of public service.
Impact of the Ruling
The judgment sets a clear precedent for limiting the scope of compassionate employment and ensuring strict adherence to rules and constitutional principles. It underscores the need for transparency and fairness in public appointments while discouraging arbitrary and politically motivated decisions.
Case Details:
Title: R. Prasanth vs. Ashok Kumar M.
Case Number: SLP(C) No. 20871/2021
This decision reinforces the principles of equality and fairness in employment while safeguarding public interest in governmental actions.
Lawcutor 