1. This petition has been preferred with a prayer to quash and set aside the communication dated 21.04.2011 passed by the respondent-authority declining to consider the request of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment and further to direct the respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioner.
2. The father of the petitioner was serving on a Class-III post with the Office of respondent no.2. He passed away on 09.08.2010 while in service. The petitioner, therefore, made application dated 17.09.2010 seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. However, the same was rejected vide communication dated 21.04.2011. Being aggrieved by the above action, the petitioner has preferred the present petition.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. It appears from the record that the respondent-authority rejected the application of the petitioner on the ground that the mother of the petitioner got service in the Postal Department on regular basis on 20.01.2011. In my opinion, the decision taken by the authority is in consonance with the policy of the State Government and I find no reasons to disturb the same.
4. Here, it would be pertinent to refer to a decision of the Apex Court in the case of Local Administration Department and another v. M. Selvanayagam @ Kumaravelu, (2011) 13 SCC 42 wherein, it has been held that the object of compassionate appointment is to provide immediate succour to family, which may suddenly find itself in dire straits as a result of death of breadwinner and that an appointment made many years after death of employee or without due consideration of financial resources available to his/her dependents and financial deprivation caused to dependents as a result of his death, simply because claimant happened to be one of the dependents of deceased employee, would be directly in conflict with Arts. 14 & 16 of the Constitution.
5. Considering the facts of the case and the decision of the Apex Court, I am of the opinion that the present petition is devoid of any merits. Hence, the petition is summarily rejected.
[K.
S. JHAVERI, J.] Pravin/* Top