1 WP 10502.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10502 OF 2010 Mahesh S/o Shuklambar Chavan .... PETITIONER V E R S U S The State of Maharashtra & Oths. .... RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. P.G.Gunale, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.K.Kadam, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for State. Mr. S.D.Dhongde, Advocate for Resp. No. 5. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & S.V. GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 27/01/2011 PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner claims appointment on compassionate ground. The petitioner’s father died in the year 2002. At that time, the petitioner was aged 13 years. After the petitioner completed 18 years of age, application came to be filed seeking appointment on compassionate ground 2 WP 10502.2010 in the year 2007. The grievance of the petitioner is that so far the respondents have not communicated the decision on the application submitted by the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that some posts are lying vacant and the name of the petitioner is not taken on seniority list. 3. The respondent no. 5 has filed affidavit in reply. In paragraph no. 4, the deponent states : “4. The deponent submits that apart from the provisions of the Govt. resolutions relating to compassionate appointments, the authorities are also considering other factors like income of the family, its financial status, immediate need of employment, availability of vacancy, seniority list of aspirants, etc. as per the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of State Bank of India & another V/s Somvir Singh reported in 2007 AIR SCW 1571 wherein the authorities therein considered factors like family pension, gratuity amount received, EPF, compensation paid by bank, proceeds of LIC policy, investment, etc. ”. 3 WP 10502.2010 4. Mr. Dhongde, learned counsel for respondent no. 5 submits that the application of the petitioner will be considered in light of the policy and appropriate decision would be taken and communicated to the petitioner within eight ( 8 ) weeks from today. The respondent no. 4 – Mr. Uppalwar is present in the Court. 5. In light of the reply and the statement made by Mr. Dhongde, learned counsel, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. [S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL,J.] knp/WP 10502.2010