Dismissed¶20

Divisional Controller, Maha. State Road Transport Corp., Akola v. Smt. Vidya Ajay Ambhore

Bombay HC4 Mar 2025WP/4643/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

MSRTC compassionate appointment; Industrial Court Akola direction upheld; NOC requirement from rival claimant Ku. Manisha Alias Mudra Ajay Ambhore; Rs.100 stamp paper; employer-employee relationship contention; writ petition dismissed; Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench; WP 4643/2024; 2025:BHC-NAG:10784; Siddheshwar S. Thombre, J.; decided 13-10-2025.

What did the court decide?

The object behind compassionate appointment is that when the bread earner loses the job and the family needs immediate financial support, the policy must give immediate relief to the legal heirs of an employee who died while in service. ¶19

Divisional Controller, Maha. State Road Transport Corp., Akola vs Smt. Vidya Ajay Ambhore — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned Industrial Court, Akola erred in granting/directing compassionate appointment to the respondent contrary to the Corporation's policy requiring a no-objection from the rival claimant (Ku. Manisha Alias Mudra Ajay Ambhore) on Rs.100/- stamp paper. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Considering the written statement, the policy placed before it, and the finding that Ku. Manisha Alias Mudra Ajay Ambhore had given no-objection stating she is financially sound and can maintain herself, the Industrial Court took a correct view and there is no reason to interfere with its findings or order.

¶20

Key takeaways

The Court found no reason to interfere with the findings recorded by the learned Industrial Court and dismissed the writ petition.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench (Siddheshwar S. Thombre, J.) dismissed Writ Petition No.4643 of 2024 filed by the Divisional Controller, MSRTC, Akola challenging the order of the learned Industrial Court, Akola directing compassionate appointment of Smt. Vidya Ajay Ambhore. The Corporation contended its policy mandated a no-objection from the rival claimant, Ku. Manisha Alias Mudra Ajay Ambhore, on Rs.100/- stamp paper, and that the Industrial Court should merely have directed consideration of the application. Holding that the object of compassionate appointment is immediate financial relief to the legal heirs of an employee who died while in service, and noting that the rival claimant had already given no-objection before the Industrial Court stating she is financially sound and can maintain herself, the Court found the Industrial Court had taken a correct view and declined to interfere. No order as to costs.

¶1

2025:BHC-NAG:10784

¶2

1 93-WP-4643-2024.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.4643 OF 2024

¶5

Divisional Controller, MSRTC, Akola Vs. Smt. Vidya Ajay Ambhore

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court's or Judge's orders of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders

¶7

Mr. V.H. Kedar, Advocate for the Petitioner.

¶8

CORAM: SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J . DATED : 13th OCTOBER, 2025

¶9

Heard Mr. V.H. Kedar, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned Industrial Court, Akola committed an apparent error while granting compassionate appointment and the same is contrary to the policy of Corporation. More particularly, he submits that in a policy, it is mandatory to give a no-objection from the other person, if there are two persons claiming appointment on the said post. He further submits that there was a specific contention raised in the written statement, whereby, respondent was asked to get NOC from Ku. Manisha Alias Mudra Ajay Ambhore. It was expected on the part of the respondent to get NOC from Ku. Manisha Alias Mudra Ajay Ambhore on a stamp paper of Rs.100/- (Rupees One Hundred Only).

¶11

He further submits that the policy holds the same for all employees and applied to all of them. The learned Industrial Court ought not to have directed the

¶12

2 93-WP-4643-2024.odt

¶13

appointment of the respondent within the time stipulated. He also stated that the learned Industrial Court ought to have directed only to consider the application and it is for the Corporation to consider it as per the policy and circular. Learned counsel for the petitioner also contended that there is no employer-employee relationship and on that count also, the order is not proper.

¶14

Thereafter, he pointed out that the learned Industrial Court has directed the Corporation to appoint respondent on the said post by recording the finding that the learned Industrial Court had called Ku. Manisha Alias Mudra Ajay Ambhore and she submits that she is financially sound and she is not putting her claim over the said post. Therefore, based on the observations that she is not claiming compassionate appointment, he urged to interfere with the order passed by the learned Industrial Court.

¶15

He further submits that the Corporation is not against the issuance of appointment order, but the circular and policy must have followed and if, Ku. Manisha Alias Mudra Ajay Ambhore, had given an undertaking, the Corporation would have certainly considered the application positively for issuance of appointment order.

¶16

I have gone through the contents raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, who vehemently submits that based on policy and circular the learned Industrial Court ought not to have entertained the complaint and ought to have dismissed it.

¶17

3 93-WP-4643-2024.odt

¶18

Having heard learned counsels for both the parties and after going through the written statement as well as the findings recorded by the learned Industrial Court, I find that the learned Industrial Court has taken a correct view.

¶19

The object behind seeking compassionate appointment is that when the bread earner loses the job and family needs immediate financial support, the policy is required to be followed to give an immediate relief to the legal heirs of an employee who died while in service.

¶20

In view of that object, considering the written statement and the policy which was already placed before the learned Industrial Court and the finding recorded by the Industrial Court that Ku. Manisha Alias Mudra Ajay Ambhore had also given no-objection by specifically stating before the learned Industrial Court that she is financially sound and she can maintain herself. I do not find any reason to interfere with the findings recorded by the Learned Industrial Court. In view of this object of granting compassionate appointment, there is no reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Industrial Court. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶21

(SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE J.)

¶22

𝒫𝓇𝒾𝓋𝑒𝓁

Divisional Controller, Maha. State Road Transport Corp., Akola v. Smt. Vidya Ajay Ambhore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Divisional Controller, Maha. State Road Transport Corp., Akola v. Smt. Vidya Ajay Ambhore

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Motilal Darshanlal Jaiswal vs Rekha Rameshlal Jaiswal and Others

Vilas Kalu Chimote vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Revenue and Forest Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

M/S Sai Stone Crusher, Survey No. 38, Gazipur, Akola Thr. Proprietor, Santosh Lunkaran Chandak vs State of Maha., Thr. Secy., Revenue and Forest Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Zilla Parishad, Gondia Thr. Chief Executive Officer and Ors. vs Salita Pawan Shahare

Meerabaksh Allahabaksh Died Thr Lrs Shakil and Others vs Indrajeet Vishwambardas Nayyar and Others

Meerabaksh Allahabaksh Died Thr Lrs Shakil and Ors. vs Indrajeet Vishwambardas Nayyar and Others