1. The present matter relates to prayer for being considered for compassionate appointment by Son of erstwhile employee of the State Government who was working as Constable in the Police Force within jurisdiction of respondent no.2 herein. This Court (Coram : H.K.Rathod, J. [as he then was]) vide order dated 07.07.2011 had passed the following order :
"Heard learned advocate Mr. A.S. Supehia, appearing on behalf of petitioner and learned AGP, Mr. Maulik Nanavati, appearing on behalf of respondent no.1.
In present petition, petitioner has challenged denial of compassionate appointment as per order dated 1st April,2010. Learned advocate Mr. Supehia submitted that father of the petitioner died on 13.2.2001 and date of birth of petitioner is 12th July,1988 and he become major on 12th July,2006. Thereafter on 17th April,2007 he has made application for compassionate appointment and he has cleared the S.S.C. Examination in March,2005. He also submitted that as per Government Resolution dated 10th March,2000 and 7th September,2002, at the time when the father of the petitioner expired, petitioner was minor, naturally such application cannot be filed within a period of six months. Therefore, all the three reasons which have been given by respondent while rejecting application for compassionate appointment is contrary to the facts and records.
If submissions made by learned advocate Mr. Supehia is right, then let petitioner may make further detailed representation against aforesaid order dated 1st April,2010 annexing all the documents which are relevant and referred by learned advocate Mr. Supehia to respondent i.e. date of birth certificate of petitioner, death certificate of father of petitioner, certificate of S.S.C. pass examination along with representation. Let this representation is to be made by petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receiving copy of present order and when respondent no.1 receive such representation from petitioner, it is directed to respondent no.1 to reexamine and reconsider the case of petitioner as well as decision dated 1st April,2010 and then to pass appropriate reasoned order after considering all the documents which are annexed to representation within a period of three months from the date of receiving such representation from petitioner and communicate decision immediately to petitioner.
In view of above observations and directions, present petition is disposed of by this Court without expressing any opinion on merits. Direct service is permitted."
2. It appears from the record that as per the direction issued by this Court, the petitioner herein filed a representation and/or further submission vide communication dated 10.10.2011 which is annexed at Annexure 'N' to the petition. It prima facie appears that in the order impugned in the present petition dated 21.9.2011, more particularly in paragraph no.4 thereof, respondent no.1 authority has not considered the averment made in paragraph no.2 of the communication dated 10.10.2011. Respondent no.1 may therefore file a further affidavit explaining the said aspect whether there is consideration of the said applicant while deciding the impugned order by way of an affidavit. Registry to give copy of this order to learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Megha Chitalia for onward communication. Such affidavit shall be filed on or before 29.2.2012. S.O. to 1.3.2012.
Sd/-
(R.M.
Chhaya, J.) M.M.BHATT Top