Madras High Court Condemns Hollow Political Promises on Compassionate Appointments
The Madras High Court has delivered a scathing critique of political leaders who make grand announcements regarding compassionate appointments, only to let them fade into oblivion. The court observed that many such declarations by ministers and chief ministers are crafted with rhetorical flourish, driven more by hope that they will be forgotten than by genuine intent to fulfill them.
Court Directs State to Submit Comprehensive Report
In a significant move, the court has directed the Tamil Nadu state government to submit a detailed report. This report must cover all announcements made concerning compassionate appointments from January 2021 to January 2026, along with data on how many of these promises actually translated into appointments. This directive aims to bring transparency and accountability to a process often mired in political posturing.
Case of Murdered Sub-Inspector's Daughter Highlights Systemic Failure
The court's remarks came during the hearing of an appeal filed by B Jeyadurgaveni, the daughter of Sub-Inspector V Balu. SI Balu, who was attached to the Eral police station in Tuticorin district, was tragically murdered in 2021 while on duty. Following this heinous crime, then Chief Minister Edappadi K Palaniswami publicly announced that Jeyadurgaveni would be provided employment on compassionate grounds. This announcement was formally published by the Department of Information and Public Relations (DIPR), lending it official credibility.
Despite repeated requests from the appellant, the government failed to honor this commitment. In 2023, the Director General of Police rejected her application, citing a government order related to compassionate appointments and claiming her family was not in economic distress. Subsequently, a single bench of the high court dismissed her petition in September 2025, leading to the current appeal.
Judges Decry Breach of Promise and Shock Over Murder
A division bench comprising Justice G Jayachandran and Justice K K Ramakrishnan underscored that this is not a routine case of seeking compassionate appointment. Instead, it stems directly from a public announcement made by the then chief minister and disseminated through official channels. The judges expressed profound dismay, stating that "the manner in which the SI was murdered will shock the conscience of any reasonable man." They noted that the then chief minister's shock likely prompted the public promise, yet for reasons unknown, he did not ensure his officials executed the announcement promptly and in full.
The bench emphasized that it is high time leaders who make such promises and fail to deliver are held accountable for their breach of commitment. They set aside the single judge's order, criticizing it for ignoring the special circumstances surrounding the chief minister's announcement.
Court Seeks Clarification from State Government
Furthermore, the court has demanded a response from the Tamil Nadu government on whether it intends to uphold the announcement made by the former chief minister or discard it and deny appointment to the appellant. This step places the onus on the state to either validate its previous commitments or openly renege on them, potentially setting a precedent for how such political promises are treated in the future.
This case sheds light on the broader issue of compassionate appointments in India, where announcements often serve as political tools without substantive follow-through. The court's intervention seeks to curb this practice, ensuring that promises made to families of those who sacrifice their lives in public service are honored with integrity and urgency.
