SCA/2297/2008 2/ 3 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No.2297 of 2008 ====================================== Manharlal K. Narela Versus The State of Gujarat and others ====================================== Appearance : Ms. Sangeeta Pahwa for the petitioner Ms. Asmita Patel, AGP, for the respondents ====================================== CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE Date : 26/06/2008 ORAL ORDER
1 Heard
learned counsel for the petitioner.
2 The
case on hand reflects culmination of recalcitrant attitude on the
part of the respondents in denying an appointment on compassionate
ground to the petitioner in spite of three orders passed by this
Court in three different writ proceedings:
[i] In
Special Civil Application No.2704 of 2004, this Court [Coram: Akil
Kureshi, J.], by order dated 27.1.2005, issued the following
directions in paragraph 7 of the said order:
ýS7. From
the above discussion, it can be seen that the petitioner had made an
application for being granted compassionate appointment well within
the time prescribed by the Government. The reason for the widow of
the Government servant to decline was also pointed out to the
authorities. The authorities, therefore, ought to have considered the
case of the petitioner on merits instead of rejecting the same on
technical ground. Under the circumstances, by quashing and setting
aside the impugned order dated 29.1.2002, it is directed that the
respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner for being
granted compassionate appointment on its merits and take a decision
and communicate the same to the petitioner within a period of 3
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With these
directions, the petition is allowed to the above extent. Rule is made
absolute to the above extent with no order as to costs. Direct
service permitted.ýý
[ii] In
Special Civil Application Nos. 12318 of 2005 and 13386 of 2005, this
Court [Coram: Jayant Patel, J.], vide Common Oral Order dated
13.1.2006, has referred to the earlier order dated 27.1.2005 passed
in Special Civil Application No.2704 of 2004 and quashed and set
aside the impugned order again with the following directions:
ýS10. Hence,
the impugned orders are quashed and set aside with the direction that
the application of the concerned petitioners shall be decided by the
respondents in light of the observations made by this Court
hereinabove and in accordance with law as per the policy prevailing
of the Government from time to time and such an exercise shall be
completed as early as possible preferably within a period of four
months from the receipt of the order of this Court.ýý
[iii] In
the third order dated 29th June 2007 in Special Civil
Application No.19385 of 2006, this Court [Coram: H.K. Rathod, J.],
after relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of
Abhishek Kumar vs. State of Haryana and others, reported in 2006 (13)
SCALE 658, observed as under:
ýS8. In
view of the aforesaid observations of the Apex Court that policy
prevailing at the relevant time must have to be taken into account
and not to consider any subsequent change or amendment. Therefore,
respondents shall have to consider the policy prevailing at the
relevant time while examining the case of the petitioner. Therefore,
the respondents are directed to re-consider the case of the
petitioner for compassionate appointment according to policy which
was prevailing at the relevant time without being influenced by order
dated 14.7.2006, 11.5.2006 and 9.11.2006 and decide independently
according to policy prevailing at the relevant time, within a
period of three months from the date of receiving the copy of this
order.ýý
3 Now,
once again, according to the petitioner, the decision is taken by the
Authorities relying upon the policy, which was not prevalent at the
time of application made by the petitioner and, therefore, the
impugned decision is in flagrant violation of the directions issued
by this Court in the above-mentioned three writ petitions and the
orders passed thereunder:
4. Issue
notice returnable on 30.6.2008.
The
Deputy Secretary, Department of Home, State of Gujarat, Gandhinagar,
respondent No.1 herein, is directed to remain personally present
before this Court on 30th June 2008.
Direct
service is permitted.
The
Office is directed to give a copy of this order to Ms. Asmita Patel,
learned Assistant Government Pleader, for quick compliance.
(ANANT
S. DAVE, J.)
(swamy)