RAMDAS KALUBHAI MALI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner joined the police force as an Unarmed Police Constable on 15.9.1965. He remained absent unauthorisedly for a period of 166 days in the year 1999 and therefore, by order dated 31.7.1999 he came to be compulsorily retired. Without dispute, that order has attained finality.

(2.) The petitioner thereafter applied for the benefit of compassionate pension and the respondent-authorities by a communication dated 9.1.2008 (Ann.C) rejected the request of the petitioner for compassionate pension. Hence, this petition.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr.Kariel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent-authorities have not exercised discretion vested in them under Rule 78(1) of the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2002 in its proper perspective and non-exercise of discretion in favour of the petitioner has resulted into a situation rendering the provisions redundant. Mr.Kariel also submitted that the decision of denial of compassionate pension has resulted into double jeopardy to the petitioner. On the one hand, he is compulsorily retired resulting into denial of pension, gratuity and other benefits, and on the other hand, he is denied compassionate pension also. Mr. Kariel submitted that, therefore, the petition may be entertained.