Director of Town Panchayat v. M. Jayabal 2025 INSC 1423 - Compassionate Appointment - Negative Discrimination - Delay
You can read our notes on this judgment in our Supreme Court Daily Digests. If you are our subscriber, you should get it in our Whatsapp CaseCiter Community at about 9pm on every working day. If you are not our subscriber yet, you can register by clicking here:
Compassionate Appointment - The dependent of a deceased employee, though eligible, is not entitled to appointment at any position on compassionate basis as a matter of right. Such appointments, made on purely humanitarian grounds, have to be viewed as exceptions to the general rules of appointment. It is important to note that mere eligibility of the applicant cannot be reason enough to materialise his/her claim for appointment on a higher post. Once a family member of the deceased employee is offered appointment on compassionate basis, the purpose stands well served. (Para 7.3) once the right of an applicant to be considered for appointment on compassionate grounds has been consummated, no further consideration is warranted. Once dependent of a deceased employee is offered employment on compassionate basis, his right stood exercised. Thereafter, no question arises for seeking appointment on a higher post. (Para 10) compassionate appointment is a relief against immense financial hardship caused by the sudden and unforeseen loss of the earning member of a family. In such event, when a dependant family member of the deceased employee is provided appointment on compassionate basis, it is done in order to ensure that the family members are not subjected to impoverishment. Therefore, such appointment which is arising out of exceptional circumstances, cannot be used as a ladder to climb up in seniority by claiming a higher post merely on the basis that he/she is eligible for such post. (Para 12) For consideration of an application for appointment on compassionate basis, financial status of the family is also a relevant factor. It is not a matter of selection or choice of an applicant for such a post, rather for the employer to consider various factors. (Para 21)
Constitution of India - Article 226 - delay in filing of writ petition before the High Court is fatal for grant of relief to the party. This principle is more applicable in the cases of compassionate appointments. The idea behind compassionate appointment is to take care of immediate financial crisis in the family of the deceased employee. In such case, the delay would mean that the family could survive even after death of the employee, as they may be having another source of income. In such circumstances, the party approaching the court with a significant delay can be denied the relief. (Para 15)
Constitution of India - Article 14- No one can approach the court and base his claim on negative discrimination merely because some relief has been granted to a person who may not be entitled to the same - he foundation of any claim based on equity has to be devoid of the element of negative discrimination. An illegality committed by an authority cannot be validated and further perpetuated by its extension to other similarly placed persons -Illegal orders, passed in case of similarly situated person, will not confer any right upon the other person to come to the court and enforce the same claiming discrimination. Such plea cannot be accepted as the authorities cannot be directed to perpetuate the wrong committed by them. The party in such cases may have different remedies. (Para 16-19)
Case Info
Case Details
- Case name: The Director of Town Panchayat & Ors. v. M. Jayabal & Anr.; The District Collector, Dharmapuri District v. M. Jayabal & Ors.
- Neutral citation: 2025 INSC 1423
- Coram: Rajesh Bindal, J.; Manmohan, J.
- Judgment date: December 12, 2025
Connected Appeals
- Civil Appeal Nos.: 12640–12643 of 2025; 12644–12647 of 2025
- Arising out of: SLP (C) Nos. 8776–8779 of 2023; 8780–8783 of 2023
- High Court judgment reviewed: Madras High Court, dated 03.07.2018 (W.A. Nos. 778–779 of 2017); Review Applications Nos. 69–70 of 2022 decided on 31.01.2023
Caselaws and Citations Referred
- Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana: 1994 INSC 189; (1994) 4 SCC 138
- I.G. (Karmik) v. Prahalad Mani Tripathi: 2007 INSC 496; (2007) 6 SCC 162
- State of Karnataka v. V. Somyashree: (2021) 12 SCC 20; 2021 SCC OnLine SC 704
- N.C. Santhosh v. State of Karnataka: (2020) 7 SCC 617; (2020) 2 SCC (L&S) 861
- State of U.P. v. Premlata: 2021 INSC 619; (2022) 1 SCC 30
- State of W.B. v. Debabrata Tiwari: 2023 INSC 202; (2025) 5 SCC 712
- Tinku v. State of Haryana: 2024 INSC 867; 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3292
- State of Rajasthan v. Umrao Singh: 1994 INSC 423; (1994) 6 SCC 560
- State of Orissa v. Laxmi Narayan Das: 2023 INSC 619; (2023) 15 SCC 273
- Jyostnamayee Mishra v. State of Odisha: 2025 INSC 87; 2025 SCC OnLine SC 117
- R. Muthukumar v. Chairman & MD, TANGEDCO: Referenced for negative equality
- Basawaraj v. Special Land Acquisition Officer: Referenced within R. Muthukumar
- Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. v. Anusree K.B.: 2022 INSC 1051; 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1331
Statutes/Laws Referred
- Constitution of India: Articles 14 and 16 (equality and public employment)
- Government Orders/compassionate appointment policies (discussed; not determinative to outcome)

#SupremCourt on Compassionate Appointment: https://t.co/CP3AsLqyZy pic.twitter.com/GptdKFU9sG
— CiteCase 🇮🇳 (@CiteCase) December 12, 2025
In Compassionate Appointment matters, never delay in approaching Courts. Here is why: https://t.co/CP3AsLqyZy pic.twitter.com/pNDy4Vos4a
— CiteCase 🇮🇳 (@CiteCase) December 12, 2025
Ignorance of law is not an excuse ! https://t.co/CP3AsLqyZy pic.twitter.com/RjHnWTwqqr
— CiteCase 🇮🇳 (@CiteCase) December 12, 2025