SCA/1603920/2007 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16039 of 2007 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 ? ========================================================= HARJIBHAI BABUBHAI PARMAR - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 4 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR RAJESH O GIDIYA for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR HH PARIKH AGP for Respondent(s) : 1-5. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 16/10/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1.0. RULE. Mr. H.H. Parikh, learned AGP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondents. 2.0. The petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the impugned communication dated 13.04.2007 passed by the SCA/1603920/2007 2/4 JUDGMENT respondent and to direct the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner on compassionate ground. 3.0. The father of the petitioner, who was working with the respondent died in harness and, therefore, after attaining majority, the petitioner made an application for appointment on compassionate ground. After various correspondences, ultimately the request of the petitioner came to be rejected by the respondent vide communication dated 30.07.2005, on the basis of the notification dated 16.03.2005. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of Special Civil Application No. 4309 of 2007, whereby the Court has directed the respondent to reconsider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent vide communication dated 13.04.2007 has rejected his application on the ground of delay. Therefore, the present petition has been filed with the aforesaid prayer. 4.0. The contention raised in the petition is to the effect that the petitioner has preferred an application on 21.04.2000 and the same was considered on the basis of the scheme subsequent to the said period and not on the basis of the scheme which was prevailing on the date of the application. Moreover, the petitioner after attaining SCA/1603920/2007 3/4 JUDGMENT majority had applied for appointment on compassionate ground and, therefore, it cannot be said that there was delay in making the application. This contention requires to be accepted inasmuch as it is well settled law that the respondent is required to consider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment on the basis of the scheme which was prevailing at the time of application. This principle is laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Abhishek Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors., reported in (2006) 12 SCC pg 44 and also in the case of SBI v. Jaspal Kaur, reported in (2007) 9 SCC pg.571 wherein it is held that the matter should be decided within the parameters of the scheme prevailing when the application for compassionate appointment was made. 5.0. In the premises aforesaid, the petition is allowed. The impugned communication dated 13.04.2007 passed by the respondent is quashed and set aside. The respondents shall give appointment to the petitioner, on the basis of the scheme which was prevailing on the date of the application, within three months from the date of receipt of this order. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs. Direct Service is permitted. SCA/1603920/2007 4/4 JUDGMENT [K.S. JHAVERI, J.] /phalguni/