Petitioner sought direction to reconsider rejection of compassionate employment application. Court rejected petition citing non-compliance with statutory time limits under Government Resolution, noting no right to employment remains.?
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE
WRIT PETITION NO.7781 OF 2005
Sagar Rajaram Patil .... Petitioner
Vs.
The Director General of Police
& Ors. .... Respondents
Shri M.R. Suryawanshi for the Petitioner.
Shri S.R. Nargolkar, AGP, for the Respondents.
CORAM: R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR &
NARESH H. PATIL, JJ.
DATED: AUGUST 21, 2006
P.C:
Heard. By the present petition the petitioner
is seeking direction to the respondents to reconsider
his application for appointment on compassionate ground.
His claim for employment on compassionate ground has
been rejected as the application was not filed within
five years from the date of the death of the person who
was in the employment, nor within one year on completion
of the age of 18 years by the petitioner. Undisputedly,
the G.R. dated 11-9-1996 requires that in case the
successor happens to be minor on the date of the death
of the Government employee, such successor can file the
application claiming employment on compassionate ground
within one year on completion of the age of 18 years.
As undisputedly no such application was filed within the
[2]
said period by the petitioner, merely because the
petitioner was not aware of the said G.R. or the
restrictions thereunder, or that he was not aware of his
entitlement to claim the employment on compassionate
ground till the date he applied in the matter, that
cannot be a justification for issuance of the direction
in the nature asked for. The question of issuance of
writ of mandamus does not arise unless there is a right
in favour of the petitioner and that is sought to be
denied by the respondents. In the absence of any right
being disclosed, question of issuance of direction does
not arise and hence the petition fails and is rejected.
(Naresh H. Patil, J.) (R.M.S.Khandeparkar, J.)
sjs/821wp7781.05
2 issues framed by the court
Whether petition filed for employment on compassionate ground can be maintained when the statutory limitation period was not complied with.
Whether lack of knowledge regarding the Government Resolution justifies extension of the limitation period for filing the application.
Sagar Rajaram Patil
The Director General of Police
Others
R.M.S. KHANDEPARKAR
NARESH H. PATIL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court