10-year delay in filing adoption papers costs woman compassionate appointment job

4 min readNew DelhiJun 25, 2026 01:24 PM IST

An insurance company had challenged the woman's appointment. (Image generated using AI)

Over 25 years after her adoptive father’s death, the Kerala High Court recently set aside a direction to appoint a woman on compassionate grounds in Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., attributing a 10-year delay in furnishing of adoption papers on her part.

A bench of Justices Devan Ramachandran and Basant Balaji also noted that the woman or her family was not in a perilous financial crisis at present on account of the demise of her father, thus incapacitating the court from offering any relief to her.

“The scenario certainly presents a situation where we cannot find the applicant or her family to be now in a perilous financial crisis, solely on account of the demise of her father; and in such perspective, the declarations of the Honourable Supreme Court in…applies in all fours; thus incapacitating us from offering any relief to her,” the order dated June 4 read.

Considering the standards fixed by the Supreme Court, the court held that the appointment of the respondent under the compassionate scheme at this stage became untenable.

Justices Devan Ramachandran and Basant Balaji

Appointment challenged

The respondent-woman claimed that she was the legally adopted daughter of the deceased employee and had applied for compassionate appointment in June 2001.

According to her, the company kept her application pending for over three years before returning it on the ground that she had failed to produce proof of her legal adoption.

She subsequently approached the High Court, following which the company agreed to consider her claim under the scheme that was in force at the time of her father’s death if she produced valid adoption documents.

Story continues below this ad

The woman later obtained a declaration from a civil court validating her adoption and again approached the company. However, her claim was eventually rejected, prompting her to file a writ petition.

A single judge directed the company to appoint her under the compassionate appointment scheme, holding that the delay in deciding her application was attributable to the insurer.

Feeling aggrieved by the decision, the insurance company challenged it before the division bench.

The insurer argued that the respondent’s claim has been rejected not solely because the ‘scheme’ has been substituted by another; but also since she had not produced any legal documents of adoption for a period of 10 years.

Story continues below this ad

The counsel for the insurance company contended that the company had undertaken that they will consider the respondent’s case under the old ‘scheme’, if she was to produce the documents of adoption as warranted in law; but that she chose not to do so until 2016.

It was further submitted that more than 25 years have now elapsed after the death of the employee and hence, the appointment under the ‘scheme’ has now become impossible.

‘Untenable’

The court held that any appointment under any compassionate scheme would be justified only to save the applicant and his/her family from imminent deracination on account of financial crisis and not otherwise.

The court also noted that more than 26 years had elapsed since the employee’s death and that the respondent was now married.

It held that her family’s present circumstances could not be said to reflect the immediate financial crisis arising from her father’s demise, making compassionate appointment legally untenable.

While acknowledging that the company had initially delayed returning the woman’s application between 2001 and 2004, the court found that the subsequent delay was attributable to the respondent herself.

“Though there was an initial delay at the hands of the company in keeping the application of the respondent, made in the year 2001, pending till 23.12.2004, all further delay can only be attributable to the respondent herself because, even though she obtained judgment from this Court, in which the company agreed to appoint her under the old ‘Scheme’ on her producing a legal document of her adoption, she chose to take the first step for it only in the year 2016,” it observed.

The court noted that the woman’s situation may be less than satisfactory, as she asserts, but it will be in a position to offer any succour only if she is entitled to it, as per law.

The court therefore allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned judgment.

Ashish Shaji is a Senior Sub-Editor at The Indian Express, where he specializes in legal journalism. Combining a formal education in law with years of editorial experience, Ashish provides authoritative coverage and nuanced analysis of court developments and landmark judicial decisions for a national audience.

Expertise

Legal Core Competency: Ashish is a law graduate (BA LLB) from IME Law College, CCSU. This academic foundation allows him to move beyond surface-level reporting, offering readers a deep-dive into the technicalities of statutes, case law, and legal precedents.

Specialized Legal Reporting: His work at The Indian Express focuses on translating the often-dense proceedings of India's top courts into clear, actionable news. His expertise includes:

Judicial Analysis: Breaking down complex orders from the Supreme Court and various High Courts.

Legal Developments: Monitoring legislative changes and their practical implications for the public and the legal fraternity.

Industry Experience: With over 5 years in the field, Ashish has contributed to several niche legal and professional platforms, honing his ability to communicate complex information. His previous experience includes:

Lawsikho: Gaining insights into legal education and practical law.

Verdictum: Focusing on high-quality legal news and court updates.

Enterslice: Working at the intersection of legal, financial, and advisory services. ... Read More

Tags:

Kerala High Court