RAJENDRABHAI JIVRAMBHAI MINA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for setting aside the communication dtd. 28/3/2018 by the respondent no.1 by which the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment came to be rejected on the ground of the application being time barred.

(2.) Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that findings given in the impugned communication regarding the application for compassionate appointment is time barred is actually incorrect. He, therefore, through the chronology of events and the documents indicating that the within the time stipulated, the petitioner had made an application for compassionate appointment to the school and the school in turn had forwarded the same to the respondent no.1-authority. However, these two applications and communications have not been taken into consideration by the respondent-authorities while dealing with the case of the petitioner for the compassionate appointment.

(3.) Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that in support of the application, even after the impugned communication, the respondent no.2-school had given clarification to indicate the manner and method in which the petitioner and the responsible officer of the school had made the necessary application in time. However, there is no answer in this regards, and therefore, the case of the petitioner deserves consideration.