SIDDRAJ ASHOKKUMAR SOLANKI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the original petitioner who preferred the petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash and set aside the order dated 12.1.2012 rejecting the application of the appellant for compassionate appointment. The appellant also sought direction in his petition against the respondents to consider his case for compassionate appointment.

(2.) The facts not in dispute are that the father of the appellant who was serving as Deputy Mamlatdar, expired on 7.11.2001. Since the appellant was minor, the mother of the appellant made application on 2.2.2002. The Collector recommended for giving compassionate appointment to her. However, the respondent No. 2 informed the Collector that the compassionate appointment could not be given to her as she was not holding required qualification. The appellant became major and acquired qualification of graduation. He, therefore, applied on 28.2.2008 for compassionate appointment. However, the respondent No. 2 informed the Collector that the application of the appellant could not be considered as the same was not within the stipulated period of six months after the demise of his father. The Collector, however, recommended the case of the petitioner to the respondent No. 1 that since the application of the mother of the appellant was within time limit but since her application was rejected on the ground that she was not having sufficient qualification, the case of the appellant was required to be considered. Since nothing was done, the appellant preferred Special Civil Application No. 12536 of 2011 and the learned Single Judge by order dated 30.8.2011 directed the respondents to reconsider the decision taken by the respondent No. 1 dated 18.11.2008 on the basis of the policy prevailing at the relevant time when the father of the appellant had expired. Pursuant to such direction, decision by impugned order dated 12.1.2012 on the application of the appellant was taken whereby his application came to be rejected as stated above, which was under challenge before the learned Single Judge.

(3.) Learned Single Judge rejected the petition by placing reliance on the judgment in the case of Local Administration Department and Another Vs. M. Selvanayagam @ Kumaravelu, 2011 13 SCC 42, wherein it is stated that the object of compassionate appointment is to provide immediate solace to family which may suddenly find itself in dire straits as a result of death of breadwinner.