Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/18225/2007 1/ 4 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 18225 of 2007
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
=========================================================
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 ?
=========================================================
SHIVAJI
RAMAJI THAKORE - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
SP MAJMUDAR for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
Mr. J.K. Shah, A.G.P. for Respondent(s) : 1,
DS
AFF.NOT FILED (N) for Respondent(s) : 1,
RULE SERVED for
Respondent(s) :
2,
========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 03/05/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
1. The
petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated
27.2.2007 whereby the application of the petitioner for compassionate
appointment was rejected on the ground of delay.
2. Father
of the petitioner, who was working with respondent, died in harness
and thereafter the petitioner made an application for compassionate
appointment.
3. Learned
Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the respondent authority
has erroneously rejected the request of the petitioner even though
the father of the petitioner had died in harness. According to him,
the delay caused in applying for appointment on compassionate ground
should have been condoned.
4. As
a result of hearing and perusal of the record, there is no dispute
that the father of the petitioner has died on 13.03.1989 and the
application for appointment on compassionate ground was made on
31.01.2000. Admittedly there is a long delay in applying for
appointment under the scheme.
5. In
the appointment on compassionate ground, there should not be any
delay in such appointment. In the case of State of Manipur Vs. Md.
Rajaodin, reported in (2003)7 SCC 511 the Apex Court has
held that when there is a long delay in applying for appointment
under the scheme, such request cannot be accepted. It is required to
be noted that the purpose of providing appointment on compassionate
ground is to mitigate the hardship due to death of the breadwinner in
the family. Such appointments should, therefore, be provided
immediately to redeem the family in distress. The facts that the ward
was a minor at the time of death of his father is no ground, unless
the scheme itself envisages specifically otherwise to state that as
and when such minor becomes a major he can be appointed without any
time consciousness or limit. The above principle is laid down in the
case of Sushma Gosain Vs. Union of India, reported in (1989) 4 SCC
468. As held in the case of Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of Bihar
and others, report in (2000)7 SCC 192, there cannot be any
reservation of a vacancy till such time as the petitioner becomes a
major after a number of years, unless there are some specific
provisions. The aforesaid view has further been reiterated by the
Apex Court in the case of Eastern Coalfields Limited Vs. Anil
Badyakar and others, reported in (2009) 13 SCC 112. In the
present case the petitioner is not able to point out any provision in
the scheme which enables the petitioner to apply for appointment on
compassionate ground after a long delay. Therefore, this Court is of
the view that the authority has rightly rejected the request of the
petitioner in view of the long delay in making application.
6. In
the premises aforesaid, I do not find any merits in the petition. The
same is accordingly rejected. Notice is discharged. No order as to
costs.
(K.S.JHAVERI,J.)
pawan
Top