Compassionate appointments require immediacy; prolonged delays in applications undermine their purpose, leading to dismissal of claims that are not timely pursued.

ORDER :

NIKHIL S. KARIEL, J.

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Riyaz Parmar on behalf of the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Nirali Sarda on behalf of respondent- State.

2. By way of this petitioner the petitioner had sought for the following prayers:

21. [A] Your lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorati or any other appropriate writ, order or direction by quashing and setting aside the communications dated 27.04.2010 and 03.05.2010 issue by the respondents, and further be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ/s, order/s, and/or direction/s directing the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner on compassionate ground on account of death of his father during the course of service on 08/11/2008 and at that time scheme for compassionate appointment was in force.

[B] Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to grant ad-interim/interim relief directing the respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioner for compassionate appointment keeping in mind the fact that his father has expired during the course of service on 08/11/2008 and at that time scheme for compassionate appointment was in force.

[C] Such other and further relief/s as may be deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may please be granted in favour of the petitioner in the interest of justice.”

3. It would appear that late father of the petitioner who was working as a Driver Class III in the office of Mamlatdar, Petlad had expired during service on 08.11.2008 and whereas the request of the petitioner being that the petitioner may be directed to be appointed on compassionate basis. It would appear in this regard that the petitioner had upon demise of his late father made an application for being appointed on compassionate basis and whereas, the said application had been rejected by the Gujarat Subordinate Service Selection Board (GSSB), on the ground that the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualification for being appointed as a Class IV employee which qualification the petitioner had to acquire within the period of six months from the date of demise of his late father. It appears that pursuant to the said decision, the petitioner had acquired the qualification i.e of passing the S.S.C. examination and had once again requested the Collector, Anand vide his communication 10.06.2011 as regards the same and further requesting that the petitioner may be granted compassionate appointment. It appears that the respondent authorities did not take any action thereupon and whereas it is in this context the present petition is preferred. It is further submitted that the petitioner in case if he is not deemed to be entitled for compassionate appointment may be granted lumpsum compensation in lieu of compassionate appointment.

4. Learned Advocate Mr. Parmar on behalf of the petitioner would submit that while the objection which had been taken was as regards the petitioner not having passed the SSC examination at the time of filing of the application for compassionate appointment and whereas the petitioner having cleared the examination within a short period of time, the respondents ought to have considered the application preferred by the petitioner on 10.06.2011. It is submitted by learned Advocate that the respondents not having considered the application in reasonable time, the petitioner ought not to be prejudiced on account of the delay caused by the respondents. It is further submitted by the learned Advocate that in case this Cour