Orissa HC Dismisses Centre’s Plea In Compassionate Appointment Case For CRPF Jawan’s Wife

Orissa HC Dismisses Centre’s Plea In Compassionate Appointment Case For CRPF Jawan’s Wife



Cuttack: The Orissa High Court has dismissed an appeal by the Union government and Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), upholding a single judge’s order to grant compassionate appointment to the wife of a permanently disabled CRPF constable.

A division bench  of Justices Dixit Krishna Shripad and Chittaranjan Dash rejected the intra-court appeal on January 15, describing the authorities’ approach as “rigid and insensitive”. The court observed that the denial contradicted the core objective of the compassionate appointment scheme, which is designed to provide immediate relief to families affected by death or severe disability in service.

The case pertains to a tragic incident on January 23, 2007, when the constable (ground duty) suffered acute physical disability in a terrorist bomb blast during combat duty in Srinagar. He was medically invalidated and discharged from service

on March 7, 2014. His wife, a graduate with a Post Graduate Diploma in Computer Applications (PGDCA), applied for compassionate appointment under the CRPF scheme introduced on January 16, 2013, which qualifies her for the post of Head Constable (Ministerial cadre). However, her request was rejected by the CRPF on June 18, 2020.

The couple challenged the rejection in the Orissa High Court in October 2020.

On October 21, 2024, a single judge directed the CRPF Directorate to appoint her to any vacant Head Constable (Ministerial) post within two months. The Centre, however, filed an appeal, arguing that she had failed a written test.

The division bench, however, dismissed this contention, stating there was no legal requirement for such a test under the scheme. It criticised the authorities for offering only a lower constable post despite her qualifications, calling it a lack of humane approach. The court stressed that compassionate appointment schemes must be liberally interpreted in favour of claimants, especially in special cases involving disability from duty-related incidents.

It further warned that failure to comply could attract Rs 50,000, recoverable from erring officials, though it refrained from imposing the penalty immediately, hoping for prompt compliance.


Exit mobile version