STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Vs. NEELAM BAGHEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on I.A. No.2544/2024, which is an application for condonation of delay.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that husband of the respondent was entered into the service as Shiksha Karmi Class-III vide order dtd. 6/1/1999 in Janpad Panchayat, Seondha District Datia. Subsequently, the services of the husband of respondent were absorbed as Sahayak Adhyapak in the same Janpad Panchayat vide order dtd. 22/2/2008. While in service working as Sahayak Adhyapak, husband of the respondent died in harness on 5/10/2015. The respondent, thereafter, in the year, 2019 submitted an application for compassionate appointment. When no action was taken on the said application, the respondent submitted various representations to the various authorities inter-alia contending that if she cannot be given appointment as Samvida Shala Shikshak, Grade-III on compassionate ground, then she may be given compassionate appointment on any Class-IV post. The District Education Officer, thereafter, vide order dtd. 27/7/2020 decided the claim of the respondent by recording that the respondent is not having requisite educational qualification for the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak, consequently, she is not eligible to be appointed as Samvida Shala Shikshak, Grade-III on compassionate ground. However, in view of the circular dtd. 18/4/2017 issued by Commissioner Public Instructions, the compassionate grant of Rs.1,00,000.00 was extended to the respondent. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the respondent filed W.P. No.12137/2020 before this Court. The learned Writ Court vide order dtd. 27/8/2020 set aside the order dtd. 27/7/2020 passed by District Education Officer and remanded the matter back to decide the application of the respondent afresh in light of the representation made by her on 22/11/2019. Inter-alia contending that she may be granted compassionate appointment on any Class-IV post. The District Education Officer reconsidered the matter and rejected the claim of the respondent vide order dtd. 15/10/2020.

(3.) The said order was again challenged by the respondent in W.P. No.16939/2020 (present matter). The said writ petition was allowed vide order dtd. 22/8/2023. In the said order, the learned Writ Court observed that on the basis of the circular dtd. 18/4/2017 issued by Commissioner Public Instruction, the earlier order dtd. 27/7/2020 was passed. The said order was set aside in the earlier round of litigation with specific direction to reconsider the case of the respondent. The authority has again decided the claim of the respondent after considering the very same circular dtd. 18/4/2017 whereas Clause 5.4 of the policy of State Government dtd. 29/9/2014 specifically provides that if candidate is not fulfilling the criteria for Class-III post, then he can be given appointment on any Class-IV post. On the aforesaid factual backdrop, learned Writ Court directed the appellant herein to give appointment to the respondent on the post of peon with the District Education Officer, Datia forthwith.