JITENDRA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these petitions, the pivotal question needs consideration is whether a reserve category candidate is entitled to be considered for compassionate appointment against a General category post ?

(2.) Brief facts necessary for adjudication of these matters are that the petitioners submitted their candidature for grant of compassionate appointment. In WP No.19731/2013, the petitioner was given compassionate appointment on 7.11.2012. However, this order was cancelled by order dated 30.9.2013 Annexure P/1. The sole reason for cancelling the appointment is that as per the reservation roster, no post in "SC category" was lying vacant. In WP No.19727/2013, the claim for compassionate appointment was denied on the ground that as per roster, no post in ST category is lying vacant. Thus, the only difference in both the cases is that in one case the compassionate appointment was given and then cancelled whereas in other matter, the application for grant of appointment was rejected. As noticed, reason for cancellation of appointment and non -grant of appointment is same i.e. non -availability of reserve category post as per reservation roster.

(3.) Shri Jaiswal, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the note -sheet Annexure R -4/3 filed in WP No.19731/2013 wherein the respondents have held that against unreserved category posts, candidates of any caste/category can be considered and appointed. However, the Government counsel supported the impugned order on the basis of reason assigned in the impugned orders. No other point is pressed by the learned counsel for the parties.