Petitioner sought compassionate appointment following father's death, but application was rejected because his wife was employed as a Patwari. Court held petitioner was not a dependent under prevailing rules and dismissed the writ petition.
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.
[2024:RJ-JP:51079]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8394/2017
Mayank Gautam S/o Late Shri Ramavtar Gautam, aged about 32 years, Resident Of Mahatma Gandhi Colony, Jhalrapatan, Tehsil Jhalrapatan, District Jhalawar Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohit Sharma for Mr. Gajender Singh Rathore Ms. Neetu Mathur For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order
12/12/2024
The present petition is filed assailing the order dated 03.02.2017 whereby, petitioner was denied qua grant of compassionate appointment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the father of the petitioner had died on 08.01.2016. Thereafter, petitioner applied for compassionate appointment which was rejected on the ground that wife of the petitioner was working as a Patwari in Jhalawar District therefore, the petitioner does not qualify to be treated as a dependent of the deceased.
(2 of 2) [CW-8394/2017]
[2024:RJ-JP:51079]
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and upon perusal of the order dated 03.02.2017 this Court has noted that the petitioners’ father died in the year 2016 and his wife is working on the post of Patwari in Jhalawar District which implies that the petitioner is not dependent of the deceased, as per the rules of the Compassionate appointment and as per the Circular dated 31.05.2016 issued by the State Government, thus petitioner is not entitled for grant of compassionate appointment .
Further, reliance is placed upon the dictum encapsulated in judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. and Ors. vs. Anusree K.B. reported in AIR 2022 SC 4766 . This Court is of the opinion that compassionate appointment is not a vested right and deems it apposite to dismiss the instant petition.
Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, stands disposed of.
(SAMEER JAIN),J
DEEPAK/61
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner qualifies as a dependent of the deceased father for compassionate appointment given his wife's employment as a Patwari?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. and Ors. vs. Anusree K.B.Relied on¶21
Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. and Ors. vs. Anusree K.B. reported in AIR 2022 SC 4766 · Who else cites this
Mayank Gautam
State Of Rajasthan
Principle Secretary, Department Of Revenue
District Collector, Jhalawar
Tehsildar, Khanpur
SAMEER JAIN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
