SOU.SWARA SACHIN KULKARNI Vs. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PUNE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the daughter of the deceased ­ Ashok Kulkarni. He was working as a wireman with the respondent no.1State ba and particularly reporting at the Pune Irrigation Project Circle, Pune. He died on 10th September, 2003. The petitioner's daughter applied for an appointment on compassionate ground on 23 rd December, 2003. Her application was accepted and after the same was processed a list of employees who were claiming compassionate appointment on the ground that they were dependents on the income of the deceased was prepared.

(2.) THE petitioner claim that her name has been deleted only because she is married. A married daughter could not have laid a claim for compassionate employment, because in the perception of the respondent nos.1 and 2, she is no longer a part of the family of the deceased. It is this stand, which is questioned before us, in this writ petition. Mr.Kulkarni, appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the facts in this case are peculiar. The deceased only had daughters. Both daughters are married. The second daughter is not interested in the job. The petitioner is interested in the job because she is supporting her widowed mother. The mother has nobody to look forward to except the petitioner ­ daughter. The petitioner has asserted that even after her marriage she is looking after her mother in her old age. In such circumstances, the deletion of her name from the list is violative of the constitutional mandate of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) IN such circumstances, the communication dated 27th February, 2009, copy of which is annexed at page 30 of the paper book cannot be sustained. The writ petition is allowed. This communication is quashed and set aside and equally the further communications in pursuance thereof. The petitioner's name shall stand restored to the wait list maintained by respondent nos.1 and 2 for appointment on compassionate basis. However, we clarify that we have not issued any direction to appoint the petitioner. Let her case be considered in terms of the applicable policy of Compassionate Appointment or Employment together with others. Her name should not be deleted or omitted only because she is married and that is why we have restored her name in the wait list. Beyond that we have not issued any direction.