#financial distress

Chhattisgarh High Court rules that compassionate appointment schemes must evaluate financial distress on a case-by-case basis, and the mere fact that a family member is employed does not automatically disqualify the claimant. The judgment reinforces that denial without such assessment violates Article 14 and undermines the scheme’s humanitarian purpose.

Meghalaya High Court clarifies that compassionate appointment under government schemes requires proof of acute financial distress at the time of application, not subsequent circumstances.

Gujarat High Court holds that compassionate appointment requires proven financial distress, not mere dependency; father's employment bars relief unless penury is established.