Contractual Engagement Deemed Regular in Nature: Punjab & Haryana High Court in Compassionate Appointment Case
In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has addressed the contentious issue of compassionate appointment and the posthumous regularization of contractual employees. In the case of Sandeep Kaur versus Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and Another, the court has notably interpreted the contractual employment of a deceased Lineman, leading to important implications for compassionate appointments and related benefits.
Legal Point: The central legal issue in this case pertained to whether the petitioner’s husband, employed on a contract basis as a Lineman with the Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. (PSPCL), should be regularized posthumously. This regularization was significant, as it directly impacted the petitioner’s entitlement to compassionate appointment and family pension.
Facts and Issues: The petitioner, Sandeep Kaur, the widow of the deceased employee, challenged the PSPCL’s denial of her compassionate appointment request. Her late husband was appointed as a Lineman on a contractual basis and had died in service. The corporation had refused the compassionate appointment on the grounds that he was not a regular employee. The critical question was whether the husband’s contractual status was regular in nature and if so, whether it entitled the petitioner to the benefits of a regular employee’s family.
Court’s Assessment: Justice Namit Kumar’s observation was pivotal. He emphasized, “The terms and conditions of the appointment letter, which have been reproduced above, also suggest that it is not mere a contractual appointment.” This was crucial in understanding the nature of the deceased’s employment. The court also examined the precedent set in Reena Devi Vs. State of Haryana and Chameli Devi Vs. Haryana Power Generation Corporation Ltd., aligning with the view that certain contractual employments bear the characteristics of regular employment.
Decision: The High Court ordered the posthumous treatment of the petitioner’s husband as a regular employee, acknowledging that he had completed the requisite period of service. Sandeep Kaur was thus entitled to all consequential benefits. However, her claims for compassionate appointment and family pension were directed to be separately considered by the respondent-corporation in accordance with the law.
Date of Decision: 15th March 2024
Sandeep Kaur vs Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. and Another
