Petitioner sought compassionate appointment despite a delay of nearly three years in filing the application. The High Court of Bombay held that the delay was abnormal and could not be condoned, dismissing the writ petition.
Petitioner's application for compassionate appointment was dismissed due to inabNormal delay.
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.
1/2 8-wp-9259-13.sxw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9259 OF 2013
Rushikesh K. Nikam ... Petitioner V/s. The Zilla Parishad, Nashik & Ors. ... Respondents
Mr. R.N. Gite for the Petitioner. Ms Anamika Malhotra for Respondent No.1. Mr. Vikas Mali, AGP for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.
CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND M. S. SONAK, JJ .
5th January, 2016 .
P.C.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that while on duty the petitioner's father died in the year 1992. The petitioner at that time was said to be a minor. The petitioner became major in the year 2009. In the year 2012, an application for appointment on compassionate ground was filed with the Zilla Parishad. The Chief Officer of Zilla Parishad informed the petitioner that there was delay of one year and nine months in filing the application on compassionate ground. The application was therefore, not considered by the respondent Zilla Parishad.
2] Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has placed on record photo-stat copy of an order passed in Writ Petition No. 10207 of
2/2 8-wp-9259-13.sxw
2010 on 9 November 2011, in support of his submission that this Court has ample powers to condone such delay. We have perused the said order. In the said case, there was a delay of nine days.
3] Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 submits that in accordance with policy framed by the State, the applications are received and considered on their own merits. The delay in this case is abnormal and it would not be appropriate to relax the norms set out by the State.
4] We have perused the record and considered the submissions. We are not convinced to condone the delay in filing the application for consideration on compassionate ground by the petitioner. Accordingly, petition is dismissed.
(M. S. SONAK, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.)
Dinesh Sherla
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay of nearly three years in filing an application for compassionate appointment should be condoned.
Rushikesh K. Nikam
The Zilla Parishad, Nashik
NARESH H. PATIL
M. S. SONAK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
