The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed a plea that challenged the order of the District Education Officer while clarifying that if the private institutions that receive State’s grant-in-aid wish to make appointments on compassionate grounds then the liability of their salary lies on the institution itself.

The Court was hearing a Writ Petition that challenged the order by the District Education Officer, which informed the private institution that although it could appoint the petitioner on compassionate grounds following the death of his father while he was employed there, the institution would not receive grant-in-aid for his salary.

The bench of Justice Vivek Jain observed, “the respondent No.5 seems to have rightly directed the institution that if the institution wishes, it can always appoint the petitioner but the liability of payment of salary would lie on the institution itself and not on the State Government.”

Advocate Satyendra Jain appeared for the Appellant and Government Advocate Naveen Dubey appeared for the Respondent.

Brief Facts-

It is the case of the Petitioner that his deceased father was employed as a lower division teacher in a private institution that receives State grants-in-aid. He said that State Executive Instructions provide for compassionate appointments for dependents of teachers working in private institutions receiving grant-in-aid and asserted that he is entitled to consideration for a compassionate appointment based on the instructions. He argued that the State Authorities should not have denied her the status of a grantee teacher.

The Court noted that the compassionate appointment was ordered by executive instructions issued at the time when the Madhya Pradesh Ashaskiya Shikshan Sanstha (Adhyapakon Tatha Anya Karamchariyon Ke Vetano Ka Sandaya) Adhiniyam,1978 was in force and after The Madhya Pradesh Ashaskiya Shikshan Sanstha (Anudan Ka Pradaya ) Adhiniyam, 1978 has come into force from April 01, 2000, no new appointments are to be made on posts receiving grant-in-aid from the State Government and the financial liability of such posts has come on the private institutions.

The Court took note of the decision of the division bench in WA No. 1578/2019 and observed, “the institution is free to appoint teachers on compassionate basis even after the amended Act has come into force but the onus of payment of salaries to such teachers could not lie on the State Government but would lie on the institution itself.”

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Petition with the observation that respondents are free to appoint the petitioner but will not claim salary from the State Government.

Cause Title: Kaushal Kumar Kachhawaha v. State of M.P.