Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BIREN VAISHNAV, J.
Rajan Husainbhai Juneja - Petitioner
Versus
State of Gujarat - Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 13821 of 2019
Decided On : 10-10-2022
Compassionate Appointment - Appointment on Compassionate Ground - 15.6.2004, 10.3.2000, 7.9.2002 - The court considered the application for compassionate appointment and directed the respondents to issue modified orders of appointment placing the petitioners in the regular scale of pay from their initial date of appointment. The court referred to the Government Resolutions dated 15.6.2004, 10.3.2000, and 7.9.2002, which provided for appointment on fixed pay for a period of five years. The court held that the objections of delay on the part of the respondents were misconceived and allowed the petitions, directing the issuance of modified orders of appointment and placement in the regular scale of pay from the initial date of appointment.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought compassionate appointment on the death of their family members and challenged the appointment on fixed pay for a period of five years. They requested to be placed in the regular scale of pay from their initial date of appointment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners were entitled to be placed in the regular scale of pay from their initial date of appointment, and the objections of delay on the part of the respondents were misconceived.
Issues: The issues involved the appointment on compassionate ground, the application of Government Resolutions dated 15.6.2004, 10.3.2000, and 7.9.2002, and the delay in approaching the court for relief.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioners were entitled to be placed in the regular scale of pay from their initial date of appointment, and the objections of delay on the part of the respondents were misconceived.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petitions, directing the respondents to issue modified orders of appointment and place the petitioners in the regular scale of pay from their initial date of appointment. The benefits were to be given with effect from 1.1.2020, and the order was to be implemented within three months from the date of receipt of the judgment.
JUDGMENT :
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent No.1 – State while Mr. H.S. Munshaw, learned advocate waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent No.2.
2. With consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.
3. Heard Ms. Harshal Pandya, learned advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Utkarsh Sharma learned AGP for the respondent-State and Mr. H.S. Munshaw learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
4. The case of the petitioner is that on death of his mother in harness on 25.10.1990 who was working as Female Health Worker with Respondent No.2, he applied for compassionate appointment on 21.07.2001 after attaining the majority. Application of the petitioner was considered by respondent No.1 permitting respondent No.2 to give appointment on compassionate ground in Class-III cadre in fix pay of Rs.2,500/- vide order dated 6.1.2005. By following instruction, respondent No.2 issued an order dated 11.4.2005 appointing petitioner as Talati-cum-Mantri in fix pay for five years and on completion of that period, he was given appointment in regular pay-scale vide order dated 28.7.2010.
5. The prayer of the petitioner is that the respondents be directed to consider the application dated 29.6.2019 as forwarded vide proposal dated 3.7.2019 treating his appointment in regular pay scale instead of fixed pay from the date of joining his duty and take appropriate decision in light of judgment and order dated 6.9.2013 in SCA No.30154/2007, judgment dated 5.4.2007 in SCA No.23384/2006 and order dated 10.010.2002 in SCA No.6813/200 of this Honorable Court.
6. Similar issue came up for consideration before this Court in group of petitions being Special Civil Application Nos.14642 of 2019 and this Court on 18.04.2022, passed the following order :
2. Heard learned advocates Mr. Bhargavi G. Thakar and Ms. Harshal Pandya for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleaders Mr. Kurven Desai, Ms. Surbhi Bhati and Mr. Krutik Parikh for State-respondents as well as learned advocates Mr. H.S. Munshaw, Mr. Devang D. Dave and Mr. Kalpesh N. Shastri for the respective Panchayats in all these petitions.
3. With the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, all these petitions are taken up for final hearing today.
4. In all these petitions, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the prayer of the petitioners is to hold and declare that they are entitled to the regular scale to the respective posts on which they were appointed on compassionate grounds.
5. For the purposes of this common oral judgment, the facts of Special Civil Application No.14642 of 2019 are considered.
5.1. The case of the petitioner is that on the death of her mother who expired on 5.8.1997 while working as a Primary Teacher under the control of the District Panchayat, Banaskantha. The petitioner applied for appointment on compassionate ground. By an order dated 25.7.2004, the State appointed the petitioner on fixed pay of Rs.2,500/- on Class-III post under the District Panchayat, Banaskantha.
5.2. Consequently, the Banaskantha District Panchayat issued a separate order dated 12.10.2004 appointing the petitioner on fixed pay as Panchayat Sahayak under the District Panchayat, Banaskantha. He was subsequently transferred to Gandhinagar. On completion of five years of service, he was appointed on regular pay scale vide an order dated 13.3.2011 with effect from 16.10.2009 in the regular pay scale. Thereafter, in the year 2016, he was promoted as Senior Clerk. The case of the petitioner is that he is entitled to be appointed on compassionate ground on regular scale of pay from his initial date of appointment i.e. from 25.7.2004 effect
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of the petitioners on compassionate grounds was based on the Resolution dated 10.3.2000, and the subsequent policy dated 15.6.....
The main legal point established is that petitioners appointed on compassionate grounds are entitled to the regular scale of pay from their initial date of appointment based on relevant Government Re....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioners were entitled to compassionate appointment based on the Resolution dated 10.3.2000, and the court directed the respondents to ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment on compassionate basis was governed by the Resolution dated 10.3.2000, irrespective of the policy prevalent at the time of con....
It is also not in dispute that after lifting of the ban, the District Compassionate Committee recommended the appellant's appointment as teacher on compassionate ground and he was appointed against t....
Compassionate appointments are not automatic and must adhere to the rules in force at the time of the employee's death, ensuring equitable treatment.
Petitioners, appointed on compassionate grounds, are entitled to regular pay scales and benefits consistent with earlier court decisions, regardless of the delay in their applications.
The court affirmed the right of petitioners, appointed on compassionate grounds, to be considered for regular pay-scale from their initial appointment date, with restrictions on arrears limited to th....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
