Dismissed police constable sought compassionate allowance under Rule 41 CCS Rules; Tribunal had refused. Court held dismissal legality was final and no special consideration applied to petitioner's case, distinguishing Mahinder Dutt Sharma and dismissing the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~75
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
versus
THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE AND ORS
.....Respondents Through: Mr. Gaurav Sharma, SPC along with Ms. Manpreet Kour, Mr. Sachin Singh, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.:
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI NARAYAN Signing Da te:1 6.02.2026 W.P.(C) 1985/2026 17:43:37
Page 1 of 4
for this lapse, a departmental inquiry was held in which the Petitioner along with other constables were found to have indulged in misconduct.
“ 41. Compassionate allowance.- (1) A Government servant who is dismissed or removed from service shall forfeit his pension and gratuity:
Provided that the authority competent to dismiss or remove him from service may, if the case is deserving of special consideration, sanction a compassionate allowance not exceeding two - thirds of pension or gratuity or both which would have been admissible to him if he had retired on superannuation pension.
(2) The competent authority shall, either on its own or after taking into consideration the representation of the Government servant, if any, examine whether any compassionate allowance is to be granted and take a decision in this regard in accordance with the proviso to sub-rule (1) not later than three months after the date of issue of the order imposing the penalty of dismissal or removal from service.
(3) The competent authority shall consider,-
(a) each case of dismissal and removal from service on its merit to decide whether the case deserves of special consideration for sanction of a compassionate allowance and, if so, the quantum thereof.
(b) the actual misconduct which occasioned the penalty of dismissal or removal from service and the kind of service rendered by the Government servant.
(c) in exceptional circumstances, factors like family members
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI NARAYAN Signing Da te:1 6.02.2026 W.P.(C) 1985/2026 17:43:37
Page 2 of 4
dependent on the Government servant along with other relevant factors.
(4) Where an order imposing the penalty of dismissal or removal from service was issued before the date of commencement of these rules and the competent authority, at that time, did not examine or decide whether or not any compassionate allowance was to be granted in that case, that authority shall take a decision in this regard not later than six months from the date of commencement of these rules.
(5) No compassionate allowance shall be sanctioned after the expiry of the aforesaid period of six months, to a Government servant on whom a penalty of dismissal or removal from service was imposed before the date of commencement of these rules.
(6) A compassionate allowance sanctioned under the proviso to subrule (1) shall not be less than the amount of minimum pension under rule 44.”
It is evident that for grant of compassionate allowance/pension, the Applicant is required to satisfy that their case is justifiably distinct, deserving of special consideration.
1 (2014) 11 SCC 684
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI NARAYAN Signing Da te:1 6.02.2026 W.P.(C) 1985/2026 17:43:37
Page 3 of 4
not as a ratio decidendi lays down that in absence of special consideration, a special allowance must be granted.
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
AMIT MAHAJAN, J.
FEBRUARY 12, 2026 s.godara/kb
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:JAI NARAYAN Signing Da te:1 6.02.2026 W.P.(C) 1985/2026 17:43:37
Page 4 of 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a dismissed constable's case deserved special consideration for compassionate allowance under Rule 41 CCS Rules despite dismissal finality.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Mahinder Dutt Sharma v. Union of IndiaDistinguished¶9
(2014) 11 SCC 684 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Suresh Chand
The Commissioner of Police
Anil Kshetarpal
Amit Mahajan
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
