ORDER :

1. Present appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent has been filed by the appellant - original petitioner against oral order dated 29.3.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 10896 of 2018, whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the petition filed by the appellant-petitioner.

2. Heard Mr. Deepak Khanchandani, learned Counsel for Mr. Gupta, learned Counsel for the appellant, Mr. H.S. Munshaw, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 4 and Mr. Jaineel Parikh, learned AGP for the respondent No. 1.

3. Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the husband of the appellant late Shri Rameshbhai Prajapati was working in Assistant Teacher in Primary School at Tikhimuvadi, Tal. Fatepura, Dist. Dahod with the respondent and while he was in service he died on 8.12.2000. It is a case of the appellant in the petition that the appellant's family was informed by the respondent that one member of her family can apply for compassionate appointment, as per the policy framed by the State Government. However, the appellant widow of the deceased employee was uneducated and therefore, she informed to the concerned respondent authority by letter dated 2.1.2001 that as and when her son becomes major, he will submit an application for compassionate appointment. Learned advocate for the appellant thereafter, submitted that the son of the appellant became major on 4.12.2007 and thereafter, he submitted an application on 6.5.2010 before the respondent authority and requested to grant compassionate appointment. However, the request made by the son of the appellant came to be rejected by the respondent authority vide communication dated 16.6.2010 in which it was stated that the application submitted by the son of the appellant is filed, as the son of the appellant did not submit an application within period of three months, as per clause 8 of G.R. dated 10.3.2000, after the death of his father. Thereafter, the appellant has submitted an application to the respondent authority and requested the authority to grant lumpsum compensation in lieu of compassionate appointment. The said application was also rejected/filed on 10.11.2014 and therefore, the appellant on behalf of her son has filed the present petition.

4. Mr. Khanchandani, learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned Single Judge dismissed the captioned petition vide impugned order mainly on the ground that there is delay in filing the petition and the son of the appellant was not entitled as per the policy framed by the State Government. The appellant has therefore, filed the present appeal.

4.1 Mr. Khanchandani, learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that as per the policy of the State Government, application for compassionate appointment can be filed within two years when legal heirs of the deceased employee attains age of majority and in the present case son of the appellant submitted such application after period of about 2 years and 5 months and therefore, the respondent authority ought to have considered the said application on merits. Learned advocate for the appellant would further submit that even as per the policy framed by the State Government, the respondent authority has not followed the procedure prescribed in clause 11 of the said policy. The relatives of the deceased were not informed about the scheme of the State Government for grant of compassionate appointment and therefore, the learned Single Judge ought to have appreciated aforesaid relevant aspects. However, learned Single Judge has dismissed the petition mainly on the ground of delay of 4 years in filing the petition. Learned advocate for the appellant therefore, urged that the impugned order be quashed and set aside and respondent authority be directed to grant compassionate appointment to the appellant or in alternative, the respondent be directed to grant lumpsum compensation to the appellant, in lieu of compassionate appointment

5. On the ot