Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
LPA/569/2004 1/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 569 of 2004
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9835 of 2002
With
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 10681 of 2003
In
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 569 of 2004
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
=========================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================
STATE
OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS
Versus
INAYAT
SULEMAN ISMAIL PATEL
=========================================Appearance
:
MS MANISHA
NARSINGHANI, ASSTT GOVERNMENT PLEADER
for the Appellants
MR
NK MAJMUDAR for the
Respondent
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
Date
: 21/07/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD)
Heard
the learned counsel for the parties.
Admittedly,
the father of the petitioner died in 1980. At that time, the
petitioner was only one year old and, therefore, he was not eligible
to be appointed. After attaining the age of majority, the petitioner
approached the appellants in 1997 for being appointment. These facts
ipso facto show that the
right of appointment under Compassionate Scheme is considered as a
vested right, which he has not. It is by way of such providence,
which is given to the family for immediate need, and in this regard,
reliance may be placed on a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in the case of Santosh Kumar Dubey Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and
others, reported in 2009 (6) SCC p.481, in which, the Supreme Court
has held as under:-
11. The
very concept of giving a compassionate appointment is to tide over
the financial difficulties that are faced by the family of the
deceased due to the death of the earning member of the family. There
is immediate loss of earning for which the family suffers financial
hardship. The benefit is given so that the family can tide over such
financial constraints.
12. The
request for appointment on compassionate grounds should be reasonable
and proximate to the time of the death of the bread earner of the
family, inasmuch as the very purpose of giving such benefit is to
make financial help available to the family to overcome sudden
economic crisis occurring in the family
of the deceased who has died in harness. But this, however, cannot be
another source of recruitment. This also cannot be treated as a
bonanza and also as a right to get an appointment in government
service.
In
the above view of the matter, we do not think that the directions
issued by the learned Single Judge are required to be followed by the
State. The order of the learned Single Judge requires to be set aside
and it is accordingly set aside. The appeal is allowed accordingly.
After
1980, much water has flown and the petitioner should have to make
attempts for getting appointment on his own merits.
In
view of the disposal of the main appeal, no order is required to be
passed on the Civil Application and it is accordingly disposed of.
(BHAGWATI
PRASAD, J.)
(K.M.THAKER,
J.)
omkar
Top