PRADHYUMAN GANPATBHAI BARIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is high time when the Government comes forward with necessary educative material with due publicity to the same to convey to the people at large that an appointment on compassionate ground is a matter of indulgence for a definite purpose and not either statutory or fundamental right of anybody.

(2.) If the bread earner has expired in the year 2002 and for any reason the family is not able to obtain compassionate employment till 2010 than that critical period is over. If the petitioner has not approached the Court at the relevant time than now there is no reason to examine the question whether the petitioner was wrongly denied the appointment on compassionate ground.

(3.) Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that there is D.O. dated 18th December 1987 issued by the General Administration Department and by that paragraph 2(2) of the earlier D.O. bearing No.Bharat/1076/408-K dated 12th May 1977 is substituted. Earlier it provided that, 'in the matters of recruitment on compassionate ground there should be age relaxation not only in the upper age limit but also in the lower age limit'. The submission of the learned advocate for the petitioner is that the said D.O. provides that, 'age relaxation can be provided upto the age of 15 years for Class-IV appointment whereas upto 17 years for Class-III appointment'. The learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that at the time of death of the father of the petitioner on 30th April 2002 he was sixteen and a half years old and, therefore, he ought to have been provided appointment on compassionate ground.