‘No sudden crisis after 20 years’: Madhya Pradesh High Court denies BSNL compassionate job to engineer son

Weather ePaper Today’s Paper Journalism of Courage Home ePaper India Cities UPSC Premium Entertainment Politics Sports World Explained Opinion Business Lifestyle Tech Subscribe Sign In TrendingUPSC OfferIPL 2026US NewsPuzzles & GamesLegal NewsFresh TakeHealthResearch🎙️ Podcast Advertisement function checkAndLoadWindowSizeScript() { if (window.jQuery) { // jQuery is loaded, include your script jQuery(document).ready(function($) { // Your existing script for checking window width if (window.innerWidth) var page_w = window.innerWidth; else if (document.all) var page_w = document.body.clientWidth; if (page_w > 1024) { $(".add-left, .add-right").show(); } else { $(".add-left, .add-right").hide(); } }); } else { // jQuery is not loaded, check again after 0.2 seconds setTimeout(checkAndLoadWindowSizeScript, 200); } } // Initial call to the function checkAndLoadWindowSizeScript(); NewsLegal‘No sudden crisis after 20 years’: Madhya Pradesh High Court denies BSNL compassionate job to engineer son ‘No sudden crisis after 20 years’: Madhya Pradesh High Court denies BSNL compassionate job to engineer son The Madhya Pradesh High Court was hearing the appeal seeking compassionate appointment by the son of a BSNL employee who died in harness in 2005.  Written by: Richa Sahay6 min readNew DelhiApr 15, 2026 07:00 AM IST The Madhya Pradesh High Court found that the employee's son and his family not only survived but managed their affairs through these two decades. (AI-generated image) Make us preferred source on Google Whatsapp twitter Facebook Reddit PRINT In a significant judgment, the Madhya Pradesh High Court recently denied compassionate appointment to the son of a BSNL employee who died in 2005, ruling that if a family can endure for 20 years and even fund an engineering degree, the “immediate financial crisis” required for a job no longer exists. Justices Vivek Rusia and Pradeep Mittal pointed out that the compassionate appointments are not a vested right but an exception carved out to meet sudden hardship.  The bench was hearing a plea challenging the Central Administrative Tribunal’s order dismissing the petitioner’s claim for compassionate appointment in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL). “In the present case, more than twenty years have elapsed since the death of the employee. The family has not only survived, but the petitioner has completed his engineering education, which itself is indicative of a certain degree of financial stability. The very object of compassionate appointment, namely to tide over a sudden crisis, stands extinguished with the passage of time,” the April 7 order read.  It was placed on record that the father of the petitioner was working in BSNL and died in harness on April 2, 2005.  Within a short span, the petitioner submitted an application for compassionate appointment on May 16, 2005. However, the petitioner allegedly received no response from the department for years.  He filed a further application in March 2016 seeking an update. Later, the department communicated in January 2020 and informed the petitioner that his case had already been rejected by a letter dated July 6, 2015.  The ground for the rejection, as stated by the department, was that he had secured only 39 points out of 100 under the compassionate appointment policy of BSNL, whereas the threshold was 55 points.  The petitioner challenged the order as well as the communication before the tribunal, but the same was dismissed. Aggrieved by this action of the tribunal, the petitioner approached this high court in 2025.  Representing the BSNL, advocate Shrikrishna Sharma submitted that BSNL adopted a uniform compassionate appointment policy, and the petitioner’s case was duly considered by the relevant committee in the year 2008 and was found to fall short of the minimum threshold of 55 points.  Sharma further added that the death of the petitioner’s father occurred in April 2005, and more than two decades have elapsed since then, during which period the family has survived and managed its affairs. “A family that has endured for over twenty years without the benefit of compassionate appointment cannot be said to be in sudden or immediate financial crisis, the foundational premise for any such appointment,” he added.  Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Kabeer Paul argued that the rejection order of July 6, 2015, was never communicated to the petitioner, and the department has failed to produce any evidence of service of the said communication. It was also urged that the weightage point system prescribed in the relevant policy of the company is discriminatory since it awards 15 points to a widow but zero points to a son/daughter. It was additionally contended that the terminal benefits received by the family of the dead employee cannot be considered as a ground to deny compassionate appointment.  Richa Sahay is a Legal Correspondent for The Indian Express, where she focuses on simplifying the complexities of the Indian judicial system. A law postgraduate, she leverages her advanced legal education to bridge the gap between technical court rulings and public understanding, ensuring that readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving legal landscape. Expertise Advanced Legal Education: As a law postgraduate, Richa possesses the academic depth required to interpret intricate statutes and constitutional nuances. Her background allows her to provide more than just summaries; she offers context-driven analysis of how legal changes impact the average citizen. Specialized Beat: She operates at the intersection of law and public policy, focusing on: Judicial Updates: Providing timely reports on orders from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts. Legal Simplification: Translating dense "legalese" into accessible, engaging narratives without sacrificing factual accuracy. Legislative Changes: Monitoring new bills, amendments, and regulatory shifts that shape Indian society. ... Read More