SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Pat) 676

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Bhola Prasad Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Harendra Pratap Singh.
For the Respondents: Mr. Ravi Kumar.

ORDER

Heard the parties.

2. The issue involved in the present writ petition is no more res integra in view of the judgment passed by the Division Bench in the case of Dilip Kumar Bhattacharya vs. State of Bihar reported in 2004 (4) PLJR 889, wherein it has been held that even the dependents of a work charged employee would be entitled for the similar benefit of compassionate appointment as has been allowed to other employees of the Government of Bihar. The petitioner has been denied consideration for appointment on compassionate ground solely on the ground that his father was working on work charged basis. It would be appropriate to quote the judgment passed by the Division Bench:—

“14. Law is well settled that if the employees fall in two different classes, then they can be classified and that will be followed for the purpose of scale, promotion and other benefits and that will not be hit by quality clause of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It is equally well settled that the Government has power to provide the facilities of compassionate appointment to the employees and deny the claim of other class of employees if the policy is valid and not in breach of equality c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top