IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13534 of 2021 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J. SHELAT ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ✓

==========================================================

GITABEN JAGDISHBHAI VAGHELA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR DADHICHI L LIMBOLA(10936) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR SIDDHARTH RAMI, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT Date : 12/03/2026

JUDGMENT

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Siddharth Rami, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

2. Heard Mr. Dadhichi L. Limbola, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Rami, learned AGP for the respondent-

State.

3. The present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:

“(A) This Honourable Court be pleased to admit and allow this petition.

(B) This Honourable court be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ that it may deem fit directing the respondents authority to either appoint the petitioner on Compassionate grounds or to pay lump sum compensation to the petitioner.

(C) Be pleased to pass such other and further order(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.

(D) Be pleased to award cost of this petition from the respondents.”

4. SHORT FACTS:

4.1. It is the case of the petitioner that her husband was serving as a peon in the Industrial Training Institute, Amreli - Respondent No. 2 herein and died in harness during his service on

13.12.2008 as he met with an accident.

4.2. The petitioner appears to have applied for compassionate appointment vide her application dated 15.09.2009, which came to be rejected by the respondent vide its communication dated 15.12.2009. It was rejected solely on the ground that she is not possessing the requisite educational qualification, i.e., 10th pass. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is only 4th pass.

4.3. Thereafter, the petitioner again appears to have filed another application dated 05.06.2012, requesting the respondents to grant her appointment on compassionate basis and/or to give lump sum compensation as per the Government Resolution dated 05.07.2011. Since the petitioner’s claim was already turned down by the respondent, then vide its communication dated 14.08.2013, followed by communication dated 19.10.2013, such claim of the petitioner was again turned down.

4.4. It further appears that the petitioner again approached the respondent to grant her lump sum compensation vide her application dated 08.01.2016, which was also turned down by the respondent vide its communication dated 04.03.2016. Despite such rejection, one after another, again the petitioner made another application on 11.03.2017, which also was rejected by the respondent vide its communication dated

22.05.2017. Hence, the present petition.

5. SUBMISSIONS OF THE PETITIONER:

5.1. Mr. Limbola, learned Advocate for the petitioner, would submit that the petitioner is an illiterate lady and is not aware about her right to challenge the first decision before this Court and as such, her financial condition is very poor due to the untimely death of her husband. It is submitted that mere delay in filing the petition may not be a ground for rejection of petitioner’s claim.

5.2. Mr. Limbola, learned Advocate would further submit that as per Government Resolution dated 10.03.2000, whereby, the respondent required to consider the claim of the petitioner to give her compassionate appointment, wherein nowhere it has been stated that compassionate appointee is required to possess minimum educational qualification, i.e., 10th pass. It is submit