The petitioner, younger brother of a deceased municipal laborer, sought compassionate appointment. The court dismissed the petition, holding that the respondents had already approved employment for the deceased's sons upon their majority, precluding the petitioner's claim.
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
ORIGINAL SIDE
WRIT PETITION NO.2521 OF 2009
Ajit Shantaram Pawar.... Petitioner
Vs.
Brihan Mumbai Municipal
Corporation.... Respondents
Ms Kalyani Shinde i/b Ms Ranjana Todankar
for the Petitioner.
Ms V.S. Gharpure for the Respondent.
DATED: APRIL 22, 2010
P.C:
1.Heard the learned counsel appearing for
the parties. The petitioner is the younger
brother of deceased Motiram Shantaram Pawar,
who was working as a laborer with the
respondents since 1-11-1990 and expired on
5-4-2001 due to illness. He has filed this
petitionforseekingappointmenton
compassionate ground on the ground that the
children of the deceased are living in harness
with their grand-parents at their native place
and, therefore, he should be provided
2
employment on compassionate ground against the
vacancy of his deceased brother. The
respondents have clarified in their affidavit
in-reply that as per Rule 4-A of the
Preferential Treatment Case Rules, the
petitioner is not entitled for appointment on
compassionate ground in place of the deceased-
employee and it has been decided to provide
employment to one of the sons of the deceased
as and when they attain majority and this has
been approved by the respondents vide approval
dated 5-7-2008, 7-7-2008 and 10-7-2008.
2.In view of the fact that the
respondents have assured employment to one of
the sons of the deceased-employee on their
attaining majority, we do not find that the
petitioner has any right to seek appointment on
compassionate ground. Therefore, we dismiss
the petition.
J.N. PATEL, J.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to appointment on compassionate ground when the corporation has assured employment to the deceased's sons upon majority.
Whether Rule 4-A of the Preferential Treatment Case Rules bars the petitioner's claim.
Whether the petition for compassionate appointment in lieu of the deceased brother should be dismissed.
Ajit Shantaram Pawar
Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corporation
J.N. PATEL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court