Posted On by &filed under Gujarat High Court, High Court.


Gujarat High Court
====================================== vs Mr on 20 December, 2010
Author: D.H.Waghela,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice J.C.Upadhyaya,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

LPA/2976/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 2976 of 2010
 

In


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3361 of 2010
 

======================================
 

SWETABEN
PURSHOTTAMBHAI PATEL 

 

Versus
 

JOINT
AGRICULTURAL DIRECTOR AND OTHERS
 

====================================== 
Appearance
: 
MR KM SHETH for Appellant. 
MR
JANAK RAVAL, AGP for Respondent No.1. 
None for Respondent Nos.2 -
3. 
======================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA
		
	

 

Date
: 14/12/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA)

1. The
appellant has called into question order dated 7.9.2010 of learned
Single Judge of this Court in Special Civil Application No.3361 of
2010, whereby petition of the appellant seeking compassionate
appointment was rejected.

2. Learned
counsel Mr.K.M.Sheth vehemently argued that the appellant had applied
in time for compassionate appointment after death of her father, on
24th August 2005, in the sense that only the petitioner’s
claim for compassionate appointment was substituted for the claim of
her brother, who was no longer interested in seeking appointment.
Learned counsel submitted that while limitation of six months was
fixed by Government Resolution dated 7.9.2002, by another even dated
Government Resolution it was made permissible to seek substitution of
name of the dependent for whom compassionate appointment could be
sought.

3. It
was, however, conceded that both the aforesaid Government Resolutions
dated 7.9.2002 were clarifying or modifying original scheme for
compassionate appointment as contained in Government Resolution dated
10.3.2000 and that the original scheme was nowhere mentioned, in the
applications or replies and not perused by the appellant. Admittedly
the appellant’s family was in receipt of monthly pension of
Rs.3,150/- plus Dearness Allowance and lumpsum amount of
Rs.3,50,000/- as gratuity, Rs.3,17,259/- out of provident fund and
Rs.1,27,388/- from the Group Insurance Scheme. As held by his Court
in order dated 23.11.2010 in Letters Patent Appeal No.2472 of 2010,
neither under aforesaid Scheme dated 10.3.2000 nor by virtue of
recent decisions of the Supreme Court the appellant or her brother
was entitled to consideration for appointment on compassionate
ground. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed in limine.

(D.H.Waghela,
J.)

(J.C.Upadhyaya,
J.)

*malek

   

Top


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

66 queries in 0.108 seconds.