JUDGMENT Hon'ble Rajesh Tandon, J.- Heard Sri B.S. Negi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Anjali Bhargava, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. By the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of clerk on compassionate ground. 3. Briefly stated that facts of the writ petition are that the father of the petitioner late Sri Jeet Singh Negi was working on the post of constable and his number was. 73698 (Constable) and father of the petitioner has died On 12-10-1987 while he was in service before attaining the age of superannuation and left behind him two sons and two daughters along with his widow. According to the averments made by the petitioner Mahipal Singh is the elder son of late Sri Jeet Singh and at the time of the death of his father he was minor, therefore, he could apply for his appointment on compassionate ground. However, the petitioner's mother Smt. Bijna Devi was applying continuously and making the request to the respondents that her son may be appointed on compassionate ground on account of the financial hardship, as will appear from Annexure-I. the letter dated 18-6-1991. The contents of the said letter are quoted below: Thereafter on 4-5-1993 the Area Organizer has directed the Commandant Group Srinagar that the application of Sml. Bijila devi has come and necessary formalities be got done in this application. The said direction is quoted below: "Copy of Smt. Bijna Devi W/o Late Ct./GD Jeet Singh Village Pali, P.O. Ming (Gadhera), District Chamnli (Gwl), along with the Part I of prescribed form of compassionate appointment. It is directed that prescribed form duly filled up in all respect may be submitted to this office in 5 copies. Application form should he accompanied with certificates of educational qualification, family details certificates etc. For assessing the case of your son for appointment on compassionate grounds, as per existing instructions of the Govt. in this regards. However, the petitioner was informed that due to the change of the policy the appointment is not possible. The said memorandum is quoted below: "Reference your application dated 30-8-94 regarding compassionate appointment. 2. It is to inform you that due to change of Government Policy on the matter there is no scope for compasisonate appointment:: 5. in this regards. However, the petitioner was informed that due to the change of the policy the appointment is not possible. The said memorandum is quoted below: "Reference your application dated 30-8-94 regarding compassionate appointment. 2. It is to inform you that due to change of Government Policy on the matter there is no scope for compasisonate appointment:: 5. As will appear from the order dated 23-7-96, the petitioner was called for interview at about 10 A.M. The said interview letter is quoted below : 6. However, again on 11-12-1996 the petitioner was called upon to give the following certificates with regard to the income etc. which is quoted below: 7. The petitioner was informed on 14-8-1997 that the papers have already been sent to the Director General for taking action. The said order is quoted below: 8. However, the petitioner submitted that the entire certificates as demanded. On 8-5-19&q the Directorate General of Security has not approved appointment of the petitioner on the compassionate ground in as much as that the family is getting regular pension. The order passed to that effect is quoted below: Memorandum "Subject: Compassionate Appointment Please refer to your memorandum No. 1II-1/79( 14) Vol-II 1/347 dated 17-2-97 & 23-4-97 on the Subject "cited above. 2. The Secretary ®, Cabinet Secretariat being the competent authority, has considered the applications of the following applicants along with other cases for appointment on compassionate grounds to Group 'C' and 'D' posts and found that there is no clement of compassion in these cases since the families have been able to sustain over a long period and have regulm means of income and as such have not approved these cases for appointment on compassionate grounds." 9. In paragraph-7 of counter affidavit it has been stated that the family has been on receipt of regular monthly pension and if they have been able to sustain themselves over a long period of time have regubr means of income of monthly pension and from the interest income earned thereon are not entitled for appointment on compassionate ground. Paragraph No. 7 is quoted below: "That the Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India and Department of Personnel & Training have laid down the cases, which are above five years old, could not be considered for appointment on compassionate ground. Paragraph No. 7 is quoted below: "That the Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India and Department of Personnel & Training have laid down the cases, which are above five years old, could not be considered for appointment on compassionate ground. It was further- stipulated in various office memoranda issued from time by the Government of India\that the norms laid down by the Govt. of India for appointment on compassionate ground should be strictly followed. If the family has been in receipt of regular monthly pension and if they have been able to sustain themselves over a long period of time having regular means of income of monthly pension and from the interest income earned thereon arc not entitled for appointment on compassionate ground. The Hon'ble Supreme Court took the same view in various recent cases of similar nature. It is further submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court have also recently in a number of cases, on the appointment on compassionate ground had taken similar view as stated above. The appointment of compassionate ground is not a legal right of the petitioner and nor the Department can be compelled to ignore the regulations and the administrative guidelines issued by the Govt. of India in this regard from time to time. A true copy of the office memorandum in this regard is riled with an annexure CA-2. The matter of petitioner was informed in accordance with Government instructions in this behalf." 10. The petitioner has filed the reply and in paragraph-9, it has been stated that the family condition is very poor and he is unable to survive and as such he is entitled for appointment on the compassionate ground and the application was filed well within time. So far as the compassionate appointment is convened by virtue of office memorandum which is applicable to the department itself issued from the Government of India:, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department bf Personnel and Training) criteria has been fixed. Clause 1(a) and (b) are quoted below: "1. To whom applicable- (a) To a son or daughter or near relative of a Government servant who dies in harness including death by suicide leaving his family in immediate need of assistance, when there is no other earning member ill the family. Clause 1(a) and (b) are quoted below: "1. To whom applicable- (a) To a son or daughter or near relative of a Government servant who dies in harness including death by suicide leaving his family in immediate need of assistance, when there is no other earning member ill the family. (b) In exceptional cases when a Department is satisfied that the condition of the family is indigene and is in great distress, the benefit of compassionate appointment may be extended to a son/daughter/near relative Government servant retired on medical grounds under Rule 38 of a Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, or corresponding provisions in the Central Civil Service Regulations before attaining the age of 55 years. In case of Group 'O' employees whose normal age of superannuation is 60 years, compassionate appointment may be considered where they are retired on "medical grounds before attaining the age of 57 years." 11. Clause-7 provides that where the death took place long ago or before five years or so it should be kept in mind that the concept of compassionate appointment is largely related to the need for immediate assistance to the family on the passing away of the Government servant in harness. The said clause-7 is quoted below: "7. Belated requests for compassionate appointments-Ministries/Departments can also consider the request for compassionate appointment even where the death took place long ago, say five years or so, while considering such belated requests it should be kept in view that the concept of compassionate appointment is largely related to the need for immediate assistance to the family on the passing away of the Government servant in harness. The very fact that the family has been able to manage somehow all these years should normally be adequate proof to show that the family had some dependable means of subsistence. Therefore, examination of such 'Call cases. for a great deal of circumspection. The decision in 'those cases may be taken at the level of Secretary only." The Apex Court in the case of State of U.P. and others v. Paras Nath A.I.R. 1998 SC page 2612 in para-5 has held as under: "The purpose of providing employment to a dependent of a Government servant dying in harness in preference to anybody else, is to mitigate the hardship caused to the family of the employee on account of his unexpected death while still in service. To alleviate the distress of the family, such appointment are permissible on compassionate grounds provided there are Rules providing for such appointment. The purpose is to provide immediate financial assistance to the family of the deceased government servant." In the case of Dhalla Ram v. Union of India 1999 SC 564, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under: l' "The very object of making appointment on compassionate grounds is to rehabilitate the family in distress of the deceased employee who dies in harness. There should be no difficulty to consider an eligible candidate for providing immediate sustenance to the members of the deceased employee. He had applied on July 15, 1987 and the application was rejected on July 14, 1988. He filed the O.A. on July 12, 1993. In view of the long delay, after the refusal by the Government, in filing the application, the same cannot be entertained. The appointment on compassionate grounds is not a method of recruitment but is a facility to provide for immediate rehabilitation to the family in distress for relieving the dependent family members of the deceased employee from destitution. 12; As will, appear from the facts of the present case that the mother of the petitioner is applying right from 1991 and the case of the mother has not been taken in to consideration on the ground that when the son applied the papers were forwarded to the Directorate General of Security and the reason to reject the claim was only on the ground that the family is getting family pension. The family pension or any other benefits can not be treated to be a bounty inasmuch as the family is entitled for the pension on account of the right earned from the services rendered by the deceased. The pension, therefore, can not be clubbed with the compassionate appointment which the family is entitled to get on account of starvation in the family and there can not be compensation in respect of the pension which the family is getting on account of the services rendered by the deceased. 13. The pension, therefore, can not be clubbed with the compassionate appointment which the family is entitled to get on account of starvation in the family and there can not be compensation in respect of the pension which the family is getting on account of the services rendered by the deceased. 13. Further it may be pointed out that to live in a dignified manner is a fundamental right as contained under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and no one can be deprived of gelling the necessities of life, as has been held by the Apex Court in the case of Kapila Hingorani v. State of Bihm; (2003)6 SCC Supreme Court Cases. The relevant paragraphs are quoted below: "52. Yet again in Shanlislar Duilders v. Narayan Khimalal Totame this court observed: (SCC p. 527, para 9) 9. Basic needs of man have traditionally been accepted to be three-food, clothing and shelter. The right to life is guaranteed in any civilized society. That would take within its sweep the right to food, the right to clothing, the right to decent environment and a reasonable accommodation to live in. 53. This Court upheld the right to shelter in P.G. Gupla v. Slale of Gujarat, Chameli Singh and Ahmedabad Municipal Corpon. Vs. Nawab Khan Gulab Khan. 54. In Chameli Singh case this court held: (SCC p. 555, para 8) "8. In any organized society, right to live as a human being is not ensured by meeting only the animal needs of man. It is secured only when he is assured of all facilities to develop himself and is freed from restrictions which inhabit his growth. All human rights are designed to achieve this object. Right to live guaranteed in any civilized society implies the right to food, water, decent environment, education, medical care and shelter. These arc basic human rights known to any civilized society." It proceeded to hold: (SCC pp. 555-56, para 8) "Right to shelter when used as an essential requisite to the right to live should be deemed to have been guaranteed as a fundamental right. As is enjoined in the directive principles, the State should be deemed to be under (In obligation to security it for its citizens, of course subject to its economic budgeting. 555-56, para 8) "Right to shelter when used as an essential requisite to the right to live should be deemed to have been guaranteed as a fundamental right. As is enjoined in the directive principles, the State should be deemed to be under (In obligation to security it for its citizens, of course subject to its economic budgeting. In a democratic society as a member of the organized civil community one should have permanent shelter so as to physically, mentally and intellectually equip oneself to improve his excellence as a useful citizen as enjoined in the fundamental duties and to be a useful citizen and equal participant in democracy. The ultimate object of making a man equipped with a right to dignity of person and equality of status is to enable him to develop himself into a cultured being." 55. The term "life" used in Article 21 of the Constitutional' India has a wide and far-reaching concept. It includes livelihood and so many other facets thereof. "Life" as observed by Field, J. in Munn v. Illinois means something more than mere animal existence and the inhibition against the deprivation of the life extends to all those limits and faculties by which life is enjoyed (See Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay v. Dilipkumar Raghavendranath Nadkarni and Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corpn.)" 14. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 8-5-1998 has been passed in the teeth of the norms contained for the compassionate appointment and the same is hereby quashed. A writ of mandamus is issued directing the respondents to consider the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground within a period or four months.