Petitioner sought writ of mandamus for compassionate appointment instead of her brother, who was already appointed. Court found no reason to interfere with existing extraordinary jurisdiction.
Writ petition is rejected.
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.
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.298 OF 2012
Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders Memoranda of Coram or directions and Registrar's orders. appearances, Court's Orders
1
Mr.H.I. Pathan, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. K.M. Suryawanshi, AGP for respondents.
CORAM :- B.R. GAVAI &
SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, JJ.
DATE :- 12TH MARCH, 2012.
PER COURT :-
1] The petitioner has approached this court for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner in place of petitioner's brother, who has already been appointed on compassionate ground.
2] Undisputedly, earlier application for grant of compassionate appointment, after the death of petitioner's father, was in the name of the petitioner's brother. In that view of the matter, we do not fine any reason to interfere in the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. Hence writ petition is rejected.
[SUNIL P. DESHMUKH,J.] [B.R. GAVAI, J.]
grt/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether writ jurisdiction can be invoked to grant compassionate appointment to the petitioner's brother's nominee in lieu of the deceased father's nominee.
Whether the High Court should interfere with a compassionate appointment already granted to the petitioner's brother.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
Respondents
B.R. GAVAI
SUNIL P. DESHMUKH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
