In Brief
A work-charged contingency employee with 23 years of service sought compassionate appointment following his death, claiming he had become a 'permanent employee' after 15 years of service. The Supreme Court clarified that 'permanent status' under Pension Rules does not equate to 'regular employee' status. Since the applicable 2008 policy barred compassionate appointment for work-charged/contingency employees, denying the appointment was lawful. However, invoking Article 142 powers to ensure complete justice, the Court increased the compassionate grant from Rs. 1,00,000 to Rs. 2,00,000, consistent with a 2014 policy amendment, and ordered release of a deposited FDR with accrued interest."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.