AMITAVA LALA, J. - (1.) It appears to this court that the petitioner's name has already been empanelled for the purpose of giving service under compassionate ground as it is reflected from the order of the. Director, Panchayet and Rural'Development dated 31-1-2002. The grievance of the petitioner is that on earlier occasion he moved the court for the purpose of obtaining an order for consideration and subsequently the matter was duty considered and his name was empanelled prior to the name of the candidate who has been given appointment. However, the same was done ignoring the empanelment of the petitioner. Therefore, the panel was interferred with. The petitioner should have been given service prior to the candidate whose name is reflected in the Annexure-'P-12' to the supplementary affidavit.
(2.) According to me, there is no manner of doubt that the service on compassionate ground is not a matter of right which is also the usual defence of the State. It has been provided for the purpose of meeting the immediate need. Compassion cannot be a perpetual compassion. Such principle is now well established. Our judicial vision is so much projected on that score that we can not visualize the other part of the concept. As a matter of fact getting any service, either through Employment Exchange, or by way of public advertisement following proper channel in an appropriate case or by way of regularization etc. cannot be the right. Therefore, all are almost at the same footing before getting service whether it is in a compassionate ground or no compassionate ground. Yet if I take a pragmatic view in the light of Directive Principles of State Policy under Article 41 of the Constitution of India, I can see that the State shall not only secure the right to work but make public assistance in appropriate cases. This is not an idle formality. It should be read in the light of the socio-economic justice which is the very foundation of rhe Indian Constitution. Judicial pronouncements never said that a right person came at a right time yet he/she should be Ignored in giving service on a compassionate ground. The judicial pronouncements only said neither a person to be allowed to get such service who came belatedly because he or she Van survive without such appointment nor compassionate appointment can be kept pending till0 attaining majority of a minor applying the same principle. Of course I have drawn a general line horeunder without judging any individual case about survival. Therefore, whenever in a candidate's candidature the compassionate ground is already accepted and/or empanelled or taken to be considered by the authority, cannot be kept pending for an indefinite period because the State authority will be trapped by the principle or immediate need. The principle of meeting the immediate need is applicable to both to whom the service will be given and with whom the service will be given. This is not a one way traffic. As because giving service on compassionate ground is not a matter of nght that does not necessarily mean inspite of empanelment or in the garb of consideration, authority will enjoy a comfortable sleep. This type of activity is straightway hit by the principle of promissory estoppel or legitimate expertation depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. Meeting the immediate need will be justified if the process of immediate empaneiment and giving immediate service is fulfilled. Otherwise the very principle of compassion will stand on no footing. As then cannot be any perpetual compassion, there should not be any delay on the part of the authority either in giving service from the panel or in making consideration and empanelment Moreover when panel is prepared. there is no scope ol the State authority to enquire about the feeding channel, the State is only concerned to exhaust the panel as early as possible. If not and it the life of the panel expires, it will be a great injustice to the incumbent which is, otherwise; derogatory and compensatory.
(3.) Therefore, the panel for giving service under the category of compassionate appointment should be exhausted as early as possible hut not beyond the period of three months which is treated as maximum period.;