SCA/5819/2008 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5819 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================= = 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================= = R.N. SADHU Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR ========================================= = Appearance : MR IS SUPEHIA for Petitioner:1 APURVA DAVE, AGP for Respondent:1-2 ========================================= = CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 09/09/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the decision of the State Government-respondent No.2, whereby SCA/5819/2008 2/4 JUDGMENT the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment has rejected on the ground that he was not holding requisite qualification. 2. The short facts of the case are as under:- 2.1 The father of the petitioner was serving as Peon with respondent No.1. During the service, he expired on 6.7.2001. 2.2 The petitioner thereafter on 01.09.2001 made an application for compassionate appointment on the post of Class-IV employee pursuant to death of his father. 2.3 The petitioner was initially called for by respondent No.2 for certain information vide its letter dated 22.3.2003. Thereafter, vide letter 30.07.2005 the application of applicant for compassionate appointment was rejected on the ground of petitioner not having passed S.S.C. Examination. The respondent No.1 also asked the petitioner to send copy of mark-sheet of S.S.C. Examination. But, as the petitioner has not passed S.S.C. Examination he could not send copy to respondent No.1. 2.4 Being aggrieved by the decision of the respondent No.2 which was confirmed by respondent No.1, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present petition. 3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is no delay in preferring the application for compassionate appointment by the petitioner. The respondent authorities have committed grave error rejecting the application of the applicant for compassionate appointment on the ground that the petitioner has not passed S.S.C. Examination. The learned counsel for the petitioner has SCA/5819/2008 3/4 JUDGMENT submitted that the respondent authorities could not reject the application applying the policy of Government Resolution dated 16.3.2005 since the petitioner has preferred application for compassionate appointment on 01.09.2001 and, therefore, the policy which prevailed at the time of making application for compassionate appointment can only be applicable to the case of the petitioner. In support of his submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble the Supreme Court reported in (2007) 9 SCC 571 in the case of State Bank of India and Others v. Jaspal Kaur. Relying on the aforesaid decision, the learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner has applied for compassionate appointment on 1st September, 2001 and in view of the above decision, the respondent authorities are required to consider the case of the petitioner as per the policy prevailing at the time of petitioner made application for compassionate appointment and as per earlier prevailing policy the requisite qualification for compassionate appointment was from Standard IV to Std.IX. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that at that relevant point of time the petitioner was studying in Std.IV and as such he was possessing requisite qualification as per policy prevailed at that point of time. 3. I have gone through the averments made in the petition and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. This Court is in complete agreement with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner regarding the decision of the Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of India and Others v. Jaspal Kaur (supra). This Court is fully abide by the decision of the Hon'ble the Supreme Court and in view of the same the previous policy prevailing at the time of making application by the petitioner SCA/5819/2008 4/4 JUDGMENT for compassionate appointment can only be applicable to the case of the petitioner instead of the policy followed by Government Resolution dated 16.3.2005 relying on which the respondent authorities have rejected the application of the applicant-present petitioner. 4. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. The order passed by the respondent No.2 authority is quashed and set aside. The respondent authorities are directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner in view of the policy prevailing at the relevant point of time when the petitioner has applied for compassionate appointment immediately after the death of his father. 5. The petition is entertained only on the aspect following the decision of the Hon'ble the Supreme Court that the petitioner is entitled for compassionate appointment as per the policy prevailing at the time when the petitioner made application for compassionate appointment. Rule is made absolute. Direct Service is permitted. (K.S.JHAVERI, J.) Amit/-