SCA/531320/2006 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5313 of 2006 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 ? ========================================= ================ SHARDABEN RAMJIBHAI DABHI - Petitioner(s) Versus DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS AND SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================= ================ Appearance : MR CB DASTOOR for Petitioner(s) : 1, GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1 - 3. ========================================= ================ CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 13/11/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the SCA/531320/2006 2/3 JUDGMENT communication dated 14.02.2006 and to direct the respondent – authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds. 2. The husband of the petitioner was serving as a Peon with the respondent and died in harness in the year 1999. The petitioner made an application to the respondent – authority seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. Thereafter, the petitioner supplied necessary details, as demanded by the respondents, vide representation dated 28.06.2000. However, the said application of the petitioner came to be rejected after a period of about seven years vide order dated 14.02.2006. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of this petition. 3. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. It is well-settled that an application for appointment on compassionate grounds is to be considered on the basis of the policy that would be prevailing at the relevant point of time. This principle is laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Abhishek Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors. reported in (2006) 12 S.C.C. 44 and also in the case of S.B.I. v. Jaspal Kaur reported in (2007) 9 S.C.C. 571. 4. In the present case, the respondent – authority has rejected the case of the petitioner by relying upon the policy of the Government prevailing at the relevant point of time. Considering SCA/531320/2006 3/3 JUDGMENT the facts of the case and the principle laid down in the aforesaid decisions, I am of the opinion that the respondent – authority was completely justified in rejecting the case of the petitioner. Hence, I do not find any reasons to interfere in this petition in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. For the foregoing reasons, the petition is summarily dismissed. [K. S. JHAVERI, J.] Pravin/*