Mukesh Kumar vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors.

The Supreme Court held that the rejection of the appellant's application for compassionate appointment was based on incorrect factual premises regarding his father's retirement and financial condition. The Court emphasized that the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and the Punjab and Haryana High Court failed to consider the actual timeline of events, including the father's retirement in 1994 and the appellant's immediate application after completing his education. The Court set aside the High Court's order and directed reconsideration of the appellant's application for compassionate appointment, establishing that the assessment of financial indigence must be based on accurate facts and evidence.