IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for immediate compassionate appointment to redeem the family in distress and the humanitarian consideration behind the provision for granting gainful employment to the dependents of a deceased employee.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Ms. Prachi Upadhyay, learned advocate for Mr. Vaibhav A. Vyas, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Udhwani, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent – State.

2. The petition is preferred by praying the following reliefs:

“7(A) Direct the respondent authorities to appoint the petitioner on compassionate ground as per her ettitlement, or in the alternative,

(B) Direct the respondent authorities to make payment of lump-sum compensation to the petitioner in lieu of compassionate appointment, as per the policy and entitlement of the petitioner, and

(C) Pending admission and final disposal of this petition, the Honourable Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground, and/ or

(D) Pending admission and final disposal of this petition, the Hounourable Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 05.01.2015 for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground, and

(E) Pending admission and final disposal of this petition, the Honourable Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to make payment of lump-sum compensation to the petitioner in lieu of compassionate ground, and”

3. The brief facts are as follows:

3.1 The father of the petitioner had joined the service of the respondent authorities as a Junior Clerk in the year, 1976, under the administrative control of the Director of NCC, Gujarat State, Ahmedabad. As per the terms of appointment, an employee was required to pass pre-service training examination and in the event of failure of pre-service training examination, the service of the employee was liable to be terminated. An employee is eligible to appear in pre-service training examination on conclusion of pre-service training course, which is conducted by the Institution of the Government of Gujarat called the Sardar Patel Institute of Public Administration (SPIPA), Ahmedabad, where the candidates are sent for training course by their respective departmental authority. For administrative reasons, the father of the petitioner could not be sent for pre-service training examination for a long time and therefore he continued to work on the post without attaining pre-service training for a period of more than two decades.

3.2 It is the case of the petitioner that the father of petitioner and other similarly situated employees came to be terminated simpliciter vide order dated 30.12.2003 for not completing pre-service training examination. Against such termination, all the employees preferred writ petition before this Court. Writ petition preferred by father of the petitioner came to be numbered as Special Civil Application No.371 of 2004. In the writ petition, this Court by way of an interim protection directed the father of the petitioner to continue in service. On 01.12.2009, due to ailment of blood cancer, father of the petitioner had passed away while in service. After the death of father of the petitioner, family pension came to be granted to mother of the petitioner.

3.3 It is the case of the petitioner that after the death of her father, he had left behind his widow (that is mother of the petitioner) and two unmarried daughters, including the present petitioner. Therefore, it was the case of the petitioner that she was entitled for appointment on compassionate ground as per the policy of the Government. An application for appointment on compassionate ground in the prescribed form along with necessary documents was made by the petitioner. Petitioner was having an educational qualification of Master’s Degree in Arts and therefore, was entitled for Class-III post. On 19.01.2010, application of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground, came to be returned back as “unsanctioned” as the case regarding regularization of service of father of the petitioner was pending before this Court. Th