1. The petitioner has prayed for the compassionate appointment.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the father of the petitioner was working as Unarmed Police Constable with respondent No.3 and while serving he expired on 22.09.1998 in a vehicular accident. His widow mother has not applied because she is illiterate. However, the elder sister of the petitioner attained the age of majority on 21.01.2007 and as per the rules, she was to make an application before 21.01.2009 i.e. within 2 years of attaining the majority. It is the say of the petitioner that she got married before she attained the age of majority, and hence, she could not apply for the compassionate appointment.
3. It is further contended by the ld. Counsel for the petitioner that in spite of order dated 27.07.2011, passed in Special Civil Application No.9208 of 2011, the respondents have not considered the case of the petitioner in its true spirit.
4. The counsel for the respondent submitted that it is the consistent policy of the Government that the eldest member of the family of the deceased has to apply for the compassionate appointment and if the eldest member is minor, then application has to be made within 2 years after attaining the majority. It is further stated by the ld. Counsel for the respondent the very object of the compassionate appointment is that the family of the deceased can come out from the crises. The father of the petitioner expired in the year 1998 and the daughter of the deceased got major in the year 2007 and the petition came to be filed after almost 14 years.
5. I have heard Mr. Sheth, ld. Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Soni, ld. Counsel for the respondents. Ld.
Counsel for the respondent contended that the petition is not maintainable in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in case of State Bank of India and Anr. Vs. Rajkumar reported in 2010 (11) SCC 661, and also in case of Union of India and Anr. Vs. B.Kishore, reported in 2011 (13) SCC 131. In the present case the petitioner's father had expired in the year 1998 and till today the family of the petitioner has survived. The main object and purpose of the compassionate appointment is that the family of the deceased can come out from the crises, but, in the present case, the family of the deceased has survived for more than 12 years and hence, the decision taken by the respondent authority is just and proper and no interference is called for.
6. Hence, in my view the petition is devoid of any merits and the same deserves to be dismissed and the same is dismissed.
[K S JHAVERI, J] Ankit* Top