Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/4507/2011 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4507 of 2011
=========================================================
RUKHSANABANU
WD/O SALIM KURESHI & 1 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MRS
KRISHNA G RAWAL for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.
Mr. AL Sharma, AGP for Respondent(s) :
1,
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 -
3.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 01/08/2011
ORAL
ORDER
Heard
learned Advocate Mrs. Krishna G. Rawal for petitioners and Mr. AL
Sharma, learned AGP for respondent State Authority.
As
per facts of present petition, petitioner No.1 is widow of
deceased Salimbhai H. Kureshi who was serving as peon in office of
respondent NO.3. He died on 28.12.2003 while on duty. Therefore,
petitioner no.1 having two minor children had applied for
compassionate appointment on 7.1.2004. However, since it was not in
prescribed format, therefore, again same application was made by
widow on 26.4.2004 but her application was rejected relying upon
Government Resolution dated 16.3.2005 fixing minimum educational
qualification of SSC for Class IV post as per order dated 20.2.2006
annexure C page 14. Thereafter, request was made by petitioner by
letter dated 11.4.2007 to respondent authority that her application
is of 2004 and Circular relied upon is dated 16.3.2005 and
therefore, subsequent policy cannot be applied with retrospective
effect. Further request was made by petitioner that at the time of
death of her husband, son was minor who become major on
16.3.2007 and has studied upto Std. 12 and hence if her case is not
to be considered, then, case of her son may be considered for such
appointment on compassionate ground and that is how petitioner made
request to respondent authority on 10.8.2010 page 22 Annexure F to
consider either case of petitioner no.1 widow or petitioner no.2 son
for appointment on compassionate ground. As per page 21 Annexure E
is dated 16th September, 2009, application made by
petitioners has been rejected by respondent authority on same
ground that petitioner no.1 is not possessing educational
qualification of SSC as per Government Resolution dated 16.3.2005
and respondent authority has no right to reconsider case of
petitioner.
Page
22 annexure F dated 10.8.2010 is representation or reply to
Secretary, Information, Broadcasting and Tourism Department,
Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar by petitioners pointing out defect made by
respondent authority while rejecting application of petitioner no.1
and petitioner no.2. However, it has remained as it is and not
decided and no response has been given by respondent authority.
Therefore,
in light of this back ground, it is directed to respondent authority
to reconsider decision dated 16.9.2009 page 21 and examine
representation of petitioners dated 10.8.2010 page 22 annexure F and
then to pass appropriate reasoned order while considering policy
which was prevailing at the time of death of husband of petitioner
no.1 who expired on 28.12.2003 and not to consider subsequent
resolution dated 16.3.2005. Let these aspects may be re-examined by
respondent authority within three months from date of receipt of
copy of present order and then immediately communicate decision to
petitioner. However, in case if ultimate order passed by respondent
authority is adverse to petitioner, then, it is open for petitioner
to challenge same before appropriate forum in accordance with law.
With
these observations and directions, this petition is disposed of by
this Court without expressing any opinion on merits.
(H.K.
Rathod,J.)
Vyas
Top