1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.1765 OF 2010 1)Smt. Sheetal Hanumant Murumkar - PETITIONER VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra & Anr. - RESPONDENTS ***** Mr.Mrs.MA Kulkarni,Advocate for Petitioner; Mr.ST Shelke, Advocate for Resp.No.2. ----- CORAM : B.R.GAVAI & K.U.CHANDIWAL,JJ. DATE : 23rd September, 2010. COURT’S ORDER (PER:-B.R.GAVAI,J.) 1) Heard. 2) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties. 3) By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the communication dated 21st July, 2007 issued by the Respondent No.2 – Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar, 2 thereby rejecting the application filed by the petitioner, seeking appointment on compassionate ground. 4) Admittedly, husband of the petitioner was working as a primary teacher with the Respondent – Zilla Parishad. While in service, husband of the petitioner died on 25th November, 2003. Subsequently, the petitioner made an application on 19th September, 2005 seeking appointment on compassionate ground. The said application came to have been rejected by the Chief Executive Officer by the impugned order on the ground that the application filed by the petitioner did not comply and satisfy the condition as contemplated in Government Resolution dated 22nd August, 2005. Hence, the present petition. 5) Smt. Kulkarni, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that on the date of death of husband of the petitioner, the 3 relevant Government Resolution, which was in vogue, permitted that an application for seeking appointment on compassionate ground could be filed within five years from the date of death of an employee. She further submits that the Government Resolution dated 22nd August, 2005 cannot be made applicable with retrospective effect. 6) Shri Shelke, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.2 – Zilla Parishad, on the contrary, submits that what is relevant is date of death of an employee and as such, if an application for seeking appointment on compassionate ground is not made within one year from the date of death of such employee, then in view of the Government Resolution dated 22nd August, 2005, such application cannot be entertained. 7) It is not in dispute that, in terms of the Government Resolution, which was in vogue on 4 25th November, 2003, i.e. the date of death of husband of the petitioner, an application, seeking appointment on compassionate ground, could be made within a period of five years from the date of death. It is only, vide Government Resolution dated 22nd August, 2005, the period of making application has been reduced to one year from five years. In the present case, the petitioner has immediately made the application within one year from the date of said Government Resolution coming into force. Firstly, we find that since the petitioner was under impression that on the basis of earlier Government Resolution, she can make an application for appointment on compassionate ground within a period of five years from the date of death of her husband and by no stretch of imagination, she could have anticipated that the Government Resolution dated 22nd August, 2005 would curtail the period of making application from five years to one year. In any case, the petitioner has applied for appointment on compassionate ground, 5 within one year from the said Government Resolution coming into force. We find that the said Government Resolution could not be construed to have been applicable retrospectively. In any event, since the earlier Government Resolution prescribed the limitation of five years for making an application, the subsequent Government Resolution, which prescribes the limitation of one year, could be considered to enable the applicant to make an application within one year from the date of said Government Resolution. 8) In that view of the matter, we find that the application filed by the petition, seeking appointment on compassionate ground could not have been rejected on the ground that it was filed beyond the period of one year from the date of death of her husband. The petition is, therefore, allowed with directions to the Respondent No.2 – Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar, to consider the application of the petitioner made for appointment on 6 compassionate ground in accordance with law and in commensurate with her qualifications. Necessary steps in that regard be taken within three months from today. Rule made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) (B.R.GAVAI) JUDGE JUDGE bdv/