Legal News

In a significant ruling on compassionate appointments, the Orissa high court has held that an adopted child cannot be denied employment benefits if the adoption was completed before the death of the employee, even if formal documentation or recognition followed later.

- 

Can't deny job benefits to adopted child: HC

A division bench of Justice Dixit Krishna Shripad and Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra on Jan 6 dismissed a petition filed by the Centre and railways challenging an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Cuttack, which had directed reconsideration of a compassionate appointment claim.

The case related to Late K. Sadhu Patra, an ex-technician (C&W) with the railways, who died in harness on April 2, 2008. His widow, K. Subhadra Patra, and adopted son K. Adamma Patra sought compassionate appointment. The railways rejected the claim in Dec 2021, arguing that no valid adoption existed and that the adoption deed was executed only in Feb 2010, after the employee's death.

The HC rejected this stand, pointing out that a civil court decree dated Feb 27, 2013 conclusively declared K. Adamma Patra as the adopted son of the deceased employee and his wife.

The decree had attained finality, as all rival claimants were parties to the suit and no appeal was filed.

Crucially, the bench noted that the civil court judgment recorded the date of adoption as July 4, 2003, well before the employee's death. "The question of adoption is no longer open to dispute," the court observed, adding that the railways could not disregard a binding judicial declaration.

While acknowledging that compassionate appointment is not a matter of right and is governed by policy, the bench said employers are bound by their own rules. The Railway Board's policy requires adoption to be completed before the employee's death-a condition satisfied in the present case.

"If the policy stipulation is complied with, there is no justification for denying rehabilitative appointment when the breadwinner dies in harness," the bench said, endorsing the CAT's reasoning.

Arbitration begins with notice, not court filing, says SC