1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 216 OF 2009 Sharad S/o Balajirao Mangnale .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents Shri S. S. Deo, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri D. R. Kale, A.G.P. for the Respondents No. 1 to 3. The Respondent No. 4 is served. Shri N. D. Kendre, Advocate for the Respondent No. 5 and 6. Shri V. D. Gunale, Advocate for the Respondent No. 7. CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL, AND N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 08TH APRIL, 2010. ORAL ORDER [Per NARESH H. PATIL, J. ] : . Heard. 02. The petitioner's father died while serving in primary school run by the respondent No. 4/Management on 04.06.2001. According to the petitioner, after acquisition of required 2 qualification, the petitioner filed application seeking appointment on compassionate ground. 03. The respondents No. 5 and 6 have filed affidavit in reply. The respondent No. 3/Education Officer Secondary has also filed affidavit in reply. The stand of the respondents No. 5 and 6 in the affidavit in reply is that the petitioner's family is possessing four plots in Udgir tahsil, the family of petitioner receives family pension of Rs. 5,500/- from the Government. The petitioner's family is having 10 acres agricultural land in village Nivli, Tq. Mukhed, Dist. Nanded. After the death of petitioner's father, petitioners family received Rs. 75,000/- towards gratuity and Rs. 50,000/- from the Government as the father of the petitioner died due to lightening. 04. Law relating to appointment on compassionate ground is well setted now. 05. The Education Officer in affidavit in reply has referred the order of School Tribunal dated 30.09.2008. In the facts of the case the said issue need not be dealt with by us in the present matter. 3 06. By communication dated 04.11.2008 Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Latur, requested the Head Master to accommodate the petitioner in service on compassionate ground. 07. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 5 submitted that there is no vacant post with the respondent No. 5/school and in view of the affidavit filed, the petitioner does not deserve appointment on compassionate ground. Leanred counsel Shri Deo submitted that, the petitioner's request is for consideration of his case for appointment on compassionate ground, on merits. 08. In the facts of the case, we observe that on the next available vacancy, the management shall consider the petitioners case for appointment on compassionate ground on its own merits and communicate it's decision to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of. We do not express any final opinion on the issue involved. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] bsb/April 10