How many compassionate appointments made in last 5 years? HC to state

Madurai: Many announcements on compassionate appointments made by ministers and chief ministers are made with rhetoric, but only with a hope they will be forgotten, Madras high court observed while directing the state to submit a report on such announcements made from Jan 2021 to Jan 2026, and how many were appointed.Taking a serious view of the fact that compassionate appointment was denied to the daughter of a sub-inspector of police (SI) who was murdered on duty in Tuticorin district in 2021, despite the announcement made by then chief minister Edappadi K Palaniswami, the court said that it is the right time for leaders who make such promises and fail to comply to be taken to task for their breach of promise.The court was hearing an appeal filed by B Jeyadurgaveni (appellant), daughter of SI V Balu, attached to the Eral police station in Tuticorin district, who was murdered in 2021. She challenged the order of the single bench, which dismissed her petition seeking employment on compassionate grounds as announced by Palaniswami, which was duly published by the department of information and public relations (DIPR).The announcement was not fulfilled by the govt despite several requests made by the appellant. In 2023, the director general of police, citing a GO issued with regard to compassionate appointments, declined her request on the ground that her family was not in economic distress. The single bench also dismissed her petition in Sept 2025. A division bench of justice G Jayachandran and justice K K Ramakrishnan observed that it is not a regular case of seeking compassionate appointment, but the request emanated from the announcement made by the then chief minister and published by DIPR. The manner in which the SI was murdered will shock the conscience of any reasonable man. The then chief minister also felt shock, and that should be the reason for making announcements in public. For reasons best known, the then chief minister did not instruct his officials to carry out his announcements in letter and spirit immediately.The judges then set aside the order of the single judge, since the special circumstance in which the then chief minister announced the offer of employment was not considered and was totally ignored.The judges also sought a response from the state on whether the govt is inclined to give effect to the announcement made by the then chief minister or discard the announcement and refuse the appointment to the appellant.