1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY : AURANGABAD BENCH WRIT PETITION NO. 455 OF 2005 Ravi s/o. Tarkeshwar Rathod, aged 31 years, occ. nil, R/o. N-7, F-54/1, Ayodhya Nagar, CIDCO, Aurangabad. - - - - Petitioner versus 1. The State of Maharashtra. 2. The Director of Higher Education, Maharashtra State, Central Building, Pune-1. 3. The Joint Director of Education, Higher Education Department, Railway Station Road, Aurangabad. 4. Vasantrao Naik Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, CIDCO, Aurangabad through its Secretary. 5. Vasantrao Naik Mahavidyalaya, N-5, CIDCO, Aurangabad through its Principal. 6. Sudhir s/o. Tarkeshwar Rathod, age 28 years, occ. service, R/o. N-7, F/54/1, Ayodhya Nagar, CIDCO, Aurangabad. - - - Respondents Shri S. S. Deve, Advocate for petitioner. Shri S. K. Kadam, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for Respondents Nos.1 to 3. Shri S. V. Gangapurwala, Advocate for Respondents Nos.4 and 5. 2 Shri Vivek Dhage, Advocate for Respondent No.6. CORAM : B. R. GAVAI & N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. Dated : 27th July 2009 PER COURT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 2. By way of present petition, the petitioner seeks writ of mandamus directing respondents to consider the petitioner's claim for appointment on compassionate ground as to the policy of the Government. 3. It is the contention of the petitioner that father of petitioner namely; Tarkeshwar Rathod, who was working as a Lecturer in Respondent No.5 College, died as he was suffering from cancer from 28-2-2001. 4. It is the contention of the petitioner that though a member from the family of the deceased was entitled to be considered for appointment on compassionate ground and though the petitioner had made several representations to the Respondents Nos.4 and 5 and though the authorities of the Education Department had also 3 directed Respondents Nos.4 and 5 to send necessary proposal to the authorities for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground, Respondents Nos.4 and 5 had denied the legitimate claim of the petitioner. The claim of the petitioner was resisted by Respondents Nos.4 and 5 on the ground that due to past conduct of the petitioner they were not willing to accommodate him in service. It is submitted that Respondents Nos.4 and 5 were willing to absorb any other member of the family of the deceased on compassionate ground. It is submitted that accordingly, proposal of the Respondent No.3 has been forwarded to the authorities of the Education Department. 5. The very purpose of the compassionate appointment is to enable the family of the deceased employee to come out of the hardships that they suffered on account of sudden demise of head of the family. One member from the family of the deceased is provided employment so that he can support other members of the family. 6. Since the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, we do not propose to go into the merits of the matter. The deceased has left behind him his wife namely; Chandrakala 4 Tarkeshwar Rathod, three sons namely; Ravi, the petitioner herein, Sudhir, respondent No.6 herein and Surendra and daughter Anusaya. There appears to be some dispute in the members of the family. Whereas respondent No.6 is one one side, all the other members of the family of the deceased are on other side. In order to verify the genuineness, the Court had also directed members of the family to remain present in this Court. Accordingly, wife of the deceased, his two sons; Ravi and Sudhir and daughter Anusaya are present and have no objection to the appointment of the brother of the petitioner Surendra on the compassionate ground. A no objection to that effect is also placed on record by the aforesaid four members of the family and the same is marked as Exhibit X-1 for the purpose of identification. Since four out of five members of the family of the deceased have agreed on the issue of compassionate appointment of Surendra, we had asked the learned Counsel for the respondents Nos.4 and 5 to seek instructions from Respondents Nos.4 and 5 as to whether they are willing to accommodate said Surendra. 7. Shri S. V. Gangapurwala, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents Nos.4 and 5, graciously states that respondents Nos.4 and 5 have no objection for appointing said 5 Surendra on compassionate ground. An undertaking has been placed on record by the respondents Nos.4 and 5 that they will forward the proposal for appointment on compassionate ground of Surendra s/o. Tarkeshwar Rathod on receipt of his application to the Joint Director, Higher Education, Aurangabad. Said Undertaking is taken on record and marked X-2 for identification. 8. Since respondents Nos.4 and 5 have agreed to consider the claim of the brother of the petitioner namely; Surendra, the petitioner namely; Surendra, the petitioner does not press present petition into service. Petition is, therefore, disposed of as withdrawn with following directions - 9. The petitioner has handed over application form for compassionate appointment signed by his brother Surendra to the learned Counsel for respondents Nos.4 and 5. The said application form shall be forwarded along with all necessary compliance to the respondent No.3 i. e. Joint Director of Higher Education, Aurangabad. 10. We are informed that there are vacancies in Class IV cadre with respondent No.5 College. As such, respondent No.3 is 6 directed to grant his approval to the appointment of Surendra s/o. Tarkeshwar Rathod on compassionate ground within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the proposal. 11. Rule disposed of in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. ( N.D.DESHPANDE, J. ) ( B. R. GAVAI, J. ) pnk/wp45505