Allowed

Harsha Jitendra Patil v. Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji High School Sanstha and Others

Bombay HC12 Apr 2016WP/2262/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a 21-year-old widow with a three-year-old daughter, filed a writ petition for appointment on compassionate grounds after her husband died in service. The Court allowed the petition, directing immediate consideration of her claim without query on delay or denial based on motor accident compensation.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondents to consider petitioner's claim in immediate/next vacancy for Class-III or Class-IV post without raising queries on delay or making other appointments.

Harsha Jitendra Patil Vs Shri Chhatrapati… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

1 6-wp2262-18.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.2262 OF 2016

¶4

Smt. Harsha Jitendra Patil,
Age 21 years, Occ. Household,
r/o. At post – Kolpimpri,
Tq. Parola, Dist.Jalgaon..Petitioner

¶5

versus

¶6

1] Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji

¶7

 High School Sanstha,
 at post Mukti,

¶8

 Tq. and Dist. Dhule

¶9

2] The Principal,

¶10

 Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji

¶11

 High School Sanstha,
 at post Mukti,

¶12

 Tq. and Dist. Dhule

¶13

3] The Education Officer,
 Zilla Parishad, Dhule..Respondents

¶14

Mr.Subodh Shah, advocate for petitioner

¶15

Mr.S.R.Patil, advocate for respondent nos.1 and 2

¶16

Mr.S.B.Yawalkar, AGP for respondent no.3

¶17

CORAM : S.S. SHINDE AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : APRIL 12, 2016

¶18

PER COURT :

¶19

Heard.

¶20

2 6-wp2262-18.odt

¶21

2]Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By
consent of the learned counsel appearing for the
parties, the petition is taken up for final
hearing.

¶22

3]The learned counsel appearing for the

¶23

petitioner has tendered across the bar a copy of
the mark sheet of Second Year, Bachelor of Arts
Degree course examination. The same is taken on
record. So also, the learned counsel appearing for
respondent nos.1 and 2 tenders across the bar the
reply on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2. The
same is taken on record.

¶24

4]The case of the petitioner is that, she is a
single parent of her three year old daughter

¶25

namely, Bhuvaneshwari. The husband of the

¶26

petitioner namely, Jitendra died in an accident
while he was in the employment of respondent nos.1

¶27

3 6-wp2262-18.odt

¶28

and 2. Respondent no.1 is governed by M.E.P.S.

¶29

Act. The petitioner being in dire need of source
of earning for livelihood, applied to respondent
no.2 as well as respondent no.3 seeking
appointment on compassionate ground. However, her
claim for appointment on compassionate ground is
being dodged. Therefore, the petitioner has been
compelled to file this Writ Petition.

¶30

5]The learned counsel appearing for the

¶31

petitioner submits that the petitioner is a widow

¶32

aged 21 years having one daughter. It is submitted
that the delay of three months caused in filing
the application for appointment on compassionate

¶33

ground, is explained by the petitioner in the
present petition. He further submits that merely
because some amount was received by the petitioner

¶34

as compensation from the Motor Accident Claims

¶35

Tribunal, the same cannot be a ground to refuse
the claim of the petitioner for appointment on

¶36

4 6-wp2262-18.odt

¶37

compassionate ground. It is further submitted that
respondent nos.1 and 2 have not demonstrated that
there is no vacancy in the school. The petitioner
is qualified to be appointed to the post of Clerk

¶38

or Peon, as the case may be. Therefore, relying
upon the grounds taken in the petition, the
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petition may be allowed.

¶39

6]On the other hand, the learned counsel

¶40

appearing for respondent nos.1 and 2, relying upon

¶41

the averments made in the affidavit-in-reply,
challenged the petition on the grounds that the
application filed by the petitioner was not within

¶42

time; the petitioner has received the compensation

¶43

amount in her motor accident claim petition and

¶44

that there is no vacancy with the respondents at
present. The learned counsel for respondent nos.1

¶45

and 2 invited our attention to the letter
addressed by respondent no.3 and submitted that it

¶46

5 6-wp2262-18.odt

¶47

is already clarified in the said letter that, as

¶48

and when a vacancy would arise in Class-III and
Class-IV category in future, keeping in view the
relevant policy, the petitioner's claim for
appointment on compassionate ground would be
considered.

¶49

7]We have heard the learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner; the learned counsel appearing
for respondent nos.1 and 2; and the learned AGP
appearing for respondent no.3 - State.

¶50

8]The petitioner, in her communication dated 22nd
April, 2013 addressed to the Education Officer
(Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Dhule, has stated the
reasons for delay of three months caused in filing
the application for appointment on compassionate
ground. The relevant portion from the said letter,
reads thus :-

¶51

6 6-wp2262-18.odt

¶52

" लगनानंतरसववावषातचमीवयाचया२१वयावषीिवधवाझाले . पतीचयािनधनानंतरमाझीवकुटुंिबयाचीमानिसकिसथतीफारहवालिदल झालेलीहोती . तयावेळीमी८मिहनयाचीगभरवतीहोती . सासरव माहेरची पिरिसथती गिरबीची असलयाने आता पुढे काय ? असा iz'u भेडसावतहोता . तशातचिद . २० / १० / २०१२रोजीमलामुलगी झाली . माझीवमाझयामुलीचाजबाबदारीचा iz'u दोघ k कुटुंबाना भेडसावतहोता . पतीचयाअपघातीिनधनाचयादुखातूनवबाळंतपानानंतर मीचारपाचमिहनयानंतरिसथरसथावरझाले . माझेकुटुंबीयानी संसथेकडेमलापतीचयाजागेचयावरसामावूनघयामहणून rksaMh िवनंतीकेली होती .”

¶53

9]In the light of the contents of the aforesaid

¶54

letter, we are satisfied that there was a genuine
cause for the delay in filing the application for
appointment on compassionate ground. Secondly,
though the petitioner has received some amount in
motor accident claims petition, the same cannot be
a ground to refuse appointment to the petitioner
on compassionate ground. Admittedly, age of the
petitioner is twenty one years and her three year
old daughter is depending upon her.

¶55

10]Therefore, in the peculiar facts of the case,

¶56

we direct the respondents to consider the claim of

¶57

7 6-wp2262-18.odt

¶58

the petitioner in the immediate/next vacancy in
Class-III or Class-IV post, which would arise with
respondent no.1 - Society.

¶59

11]We make it clear that the respondents shall
not raise any query about delay in filing the
application for appointment on compassionate
ground or shall not negate the claim of the
petitioner on unsustainable ground, and shall
consider the same keeping in view the fact that
the petitioner is a twenty one year old widow
having the responsibility to maintain her three
year old daughter.

¶60

12]We make it clear that respondent nos.1 and 2
shall not make any further appointment to the post
of Clerk or Peon, as the case may be, unless the
claim of the petitioner is considered in the
immediate/next vacancy.

¶61

8 6-wp2262-18.odt

¶62

13] The petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute

¶63

in the above terms.

¶64

14] The parties to act on authenticated copies of

¶65

this order.

¶66

[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.][S.S. SHINDE, J.]

¶67

kbp

Harsha Jitendra Patil v. Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji High School Sanstha and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harsha Jitendra Patil v. Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji High School Sanstha and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Marathwada Sarvoday Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Jalna Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Madhav Laluji Pallewad and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vitthal Punaji Rathod and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kiran Milind Magar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vyankat Ramdas Jadhav and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

The Maharashtra Rajya Prathmik Shikshak Samiti Thr Its Secretary Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another