1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 4.9.2010 passed by the respondents herein whereby the application for compassionate appointment was rejected on the ground that financial position of the petitioner does not appear to be in pitiable condition.
2. The father of the petitioner who was working as a Junior Clerk with Shri J.V. Sarva Vidhyalay and R.H. Patel Higher Secondary School had died in harness on 1.2.2009. The petitioner, therefore, made an application for compassionate appointment on 11.02.2009.
3. The application of the petitioner was rejected by the respondents and the said decision has been communicated to the petitioner vide communication dated 4th September 2010 on the ground that the financial condition of the petitioner was not pitiable.
4 Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the family pension and post death benefits received by family cannot be considered while considering the claim for compassionate appointment. He has placed reliance on a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Balbir Kaur and another Vs. Steel Authority of India Limited and others, reported in (2000)6 SCC 493.
5. The father of the petitioner died in the year 2009 and three years has passed since then. The family has survived. The financial condition of the family of the petitioner cannot be said to be in penury. If any appointment is given to the petitioner in these circumstances, then, that would amount to negativing the very idea of granting appointment on compassionate basis. If the very idea of grant of compassionate appointment is hit at bottom, then, such appointments should not be made because, it is not a State largess which is to be distributed. In fact, this scheme is for those families which are in fact are in penury and without any means of livelihood and is not a successive right.
6 In that view of the matter, this Court is of the view that any appointment if offered to the petitioner would go against the Scheme in view of the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of STATE BANK OF INDIA & OTHERS V JASPAL KAUR, reported in (2007) 9 SCC 571. The opinion expressed herein above is in conformity with this law. In light of the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Court is of the opinion that the opinion of this Court is not without the foundation. Therefore, the petition is rejected.
(K.S.Jhaveri, J.) *mohd Top