1 IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE APPELLATE APPELLATE JURISDICTION JURISDICTION JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION PETITION PETITION NO.3787 OF 2007 NO.3787 OF 2007 NO.3787 OF 2007 Shri Shri Shri Ramesh Ramchandra Shinde .. Petitioner Ramesh Ramchandra Shinde .. Petitioner Ramesh Ramchandra Shinde .. Petitioner vs vs vs The The The District District District Health Officer .. Respondents Health Officer .. Respondents Health Officer .. Respondents Pune Pune Pune Zilla Zilla Zilla Parishad & ors Parishad & ors Parishad & ors Mr.S.V.Pitre Mr.S.V.Pitre Mr.S.V.Pitre for Petitioner for Petitioner for Petitioner CORAM CORAM CORAM : S.B.MHASE AND : S.B.MHASE AND : S.B.MHASE AND D.G.KARNIK, D.G.KARNIK, D.G.KARNIK, JJ JJ JJ DATED DATED DATED : : : 16th July, 2007 16th July, 2007 16th July, 2007 P.C. P.C. P.C. This This This is a matter about compassionate is a matter about compassionate is a matter about compassionate appointment. appointment. appointment. The petitioner’s mother’s services The petitioner’s mother’s services The petitioner’s mother’s services were were were terminated. terminated. terminated. However, due to the orders passed However, due to the orders passed However, due to the orders passed inin in industrial reference, there is an order of industrial reference, there is an order of industrial reference, there is an order of reinstatement reinstatement reinstatement in her favour. However, the fact in her favour. However, the fact in her favour. However, the fact remains remains remains that during her life time she was not that during her life time she was not that during her life time she was not actually actually actually reinstated. It appears that she expired reinstated. It appears that she expired reinstated. It appears that she expired on on on 9th May, 2005 and thereafter the petitioner has 9th May, 2005 and thereafter the petitioner has 9th May, 2005 and thereafter the petitioner has made made made an an an application for employment on compassionate application for employment on compassionate application for employment on compassionate ground ground ground to the respondents. Since the petitioner’s to the respondents. Since the petitioner’s to the respondents. Since the petitioner’s claim claim claim is not considered, the petitioner has is not considered, the petitioner has is not considered, the petitioner has approached approached approached this Court. this Court. this Court. 2.2.2. It is abundantly clear that when the mother of It is abundantly clear that when the mother of It is abundantly clear that when the mother of the the the petitioner expired, the age of the petitioner petitioner expired, the age of the petitioner petitioner expired, the age of the petitioner was was was of of of 40 years and thereby he was not dependent on 40 years and thereby he was not dependent on 40 years and thereby he was not dependent on his his his mother. The facts are eloquent for our mother. The facts are eloquent for our mother. The facts are eloquent for our 2 purpose, purpose, purpose, namely for seeking a compassionate namely for seeking a compassionate namely for seeking a compassionate appointment, appointment, appointment, a person must be a dependent on the a person must be a dependent on the a person must be a dependent on the deceased deceased deceased and that as a result of the death of the and that as a result of the death of the and that as a result of the death of the person person person the family is thrown on the road. That the family is thrown on the road. That the family is thrown on the road. That creates creates creates a compassionate ground in favour of that a compassionate ground in favour of that a compassionate ground in favour of that family. family. family. Now since during the life time of his Now since during the life time of his Now since during the life time of his mother mother mother the petitioner had attained the age of 40 the petitioner had attained the age of 40 the petitioner had attained the age of 40 years years years he was not in any way dependent on his he was not in any way dependent on his he was not in any way dependent on his mother. mother. mother. Apart from that though the mother of the Apart from that though the mother of the Apart from that though the mother of the petitioner petitioner petitioner had claimed to be in service, she was had claimed to be in service, she was had claimed to be in service, she was not not not in service thereby she was not getting any in service thereby she was not getting any in service thereby she was not getting any pecuniary pecuniary pecuniary salary from 1992 onwards from the salary from 1992 onwards from the salary from 1992 onwards from the respondent-Zilla respondent-Zilla respondent-Zilla Parishad. Thus, considering the Parishad. Thus, considering the Parishad. Thus, considering the case case case of the petitioner in the light of the Supreme of the petitioner in the light of the Supreme of the petitioner in the light of the Supreme Court Court Court Judgments wherein it is observed that Judgments wherein it is observed that Judgments wherein it is observed that compassionate compassionate compassionate appointment is not a right in favour appointment is not a right in favour appointment is not a right in favour of of of any person, but a sympathetic wish of the any person, but a sympathetic wish of the any person, but a sympathetic wish of the employer employer employer to the family of the deceased so as to to the family of the deceased so as to to the family of the deceased so as to protect protect protect them from being thrown on road as a result them from being thrown on road as a result them from being thrown on road as a result of of of the the the unfortunate death in the family of the bread unfortunate death in the family of the bread unfortunate death in the family of the bread earner. earner. earner. Thus evaluated the case of the petitioner, Thus evaluated the case of the petitioner, Thus evaluated the case of the petitioner, the the the petitioner is not entitled for compassionate petitioner is not entitled for compassionate petitioner is not entitled for compassionate appointment. appointment. appointment. 3.3.3. We repeatedly asked the learned counsel for the We repeatedly asked the learned counsel for the We repeatedly asked the learned counsel for the petitioner petitioner petitioner that before addressing the Court on that before addressing the Court on that before addressing the Court on facts, facts, facts, it will be better that the learned counsel it will be better that the learned counsel it will be better that the learned counsel puts puts puts up up up before this Court the judgments of the Apex before this Court the judgments of the Apex before this Court the judgments of the Apex Court Court Court so that the facts of the petitioner can be so that the facts of the petitioner can be so that the facts of the petitioner can be understood understood understood and can be analysed in the light of the and can be analysed in the light of the and can be analysed in the light of the 3 Supreme Supreme Supreme Court judgments. However, it is Court judgments. However, it is Court judgments. However, it is unfortunate unfortunate unfortunate to note that the learned counsel to note that the learned counsel to note that the learned counsel submitted submitted submitted that he is not under an obligation to that he is not under an obligation to that he is not under an obligation to point point point out any adverse judgments to the petitioner. out any adverse judgments to the petitioner. out any adverse judgments to the petitioner. We We We reminded the learned counsel that he is an reminded the learned counsel that he is an reminded the learned counsel that he is an officer officer officer of of of the Court and as an officer of the court the Court and as an officer of the court the Court and as an officer of the court he he he owes owes owes a duty to point out the correct position of a duty to point out the correct position of a duty to point out the correct position of law. law. law. Inspite of that learned counsel consistently Inspite of that learned counsel consistently Inspite of that learned counsel consistently persisted persisted persisted for arguing the matter on facts only and for arguing the matter on facts only and for arguing the matter on facts only and avoided avoided avoided to show the precedents laid down by the to show the precedents laid down by the to show the precedents laid down by the Apex Apex Apex Court and he tried to make a hue and cry that Court and he tried to make a hue and cry that Court and he tried to make a hue and cry that he he he is is is not obliged. This is very unfortunate on the not obliged. This is very unfortunate on the not obliged. This is very unfortunate on the part part part of of of a bar member to make such a statement. His a bar member to make such a statement. His a bar member to make such a statement. His statement statement statement shows that he was unable to show the shows that he was unable to show the shows that he was unable to show the judgments. judgments. judgments. He should have asked for time and we He should have asked for time and we He should have asked for time and we would would would have considered the same. But, unfortunately have considered the same. But, unfortunately have considered the same. But, unfortunately such such such a prayer was not made. On the contrary, a a prayer was not made. On the contrary, a a prayer was not made. On the contrary, a statement statement statement was was was made that he is not able to point out made that he is not able to point out made that he is not able to point out any any any adverse judgments to this Court and he was adverse judgments to this Court and he was adverse judgments to this Court and he was arguing arguing arguing the case on facts. the case on facts. the case on facts. 4.4.4. Under these circumstances, we are constrained Under these circumstances, we are constrained Under these circumstances, we are constrained toto to pass this order. We find that there is no pass this order. We find that there is no pass this order. We find that there is no substance substance substance in the petition. It is hereby rejected. in the petition. It is hereby rejected. in the petition. It is hereby rejected. (D.G.Karnik, (D.G.Karnik, (D.G.Karnik, ,J) ,J) ,J) (S.B.Mhase, (S.B.Mhase, (S.B.Mhase, J) J) J)