Dismissed

Sunil Meena S/O Jagmohan Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC7 May 2025SAW/455/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a special appeal against an order rejecting a claim for compassionate appointment made by an applicant who was a minor at the time of his father's death. The Court held that the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment Rules, 1996 do not provide for consideration of such applicants after attaining majority, noting that such a provision was previously removed.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sunil Meena S/O Jagmohan Meena Vs the State of… — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:19201-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 455/2025

¶4

Sunil Meena S/o Jagmohan Meena, Aged About 20 Years, R/o Rasulpura, Kher Kheda Bhoora, District Baran (Rajasthan).

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Additional Chief Secretary, School Education And Bhasha, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶8

The Director, Secondary Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner. 3. The Chief District Education Officer, Holistic Education, Baran.

¶9

The District Education Officer (H.q.), Elementary Education, Baran.

¶10

The Chief Block Elementary Education Officer, Holistic Education, Baran.

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Appellant(s)	: Mr. SukhrajSingh Rathore
For Respondent(s)	:

¶13

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT

¶14

Order

¶15

07/05/2025

¶16

Heard on admission.

¶17

Though learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant was entitled to be considered for compassionate appointment upon attaining the age of majority as the purpose of compassionate appointment is to provide financial support and means of livelihood to the families of the deceased government servant, we are unable to accept as the extant rule which were in force on the date of the death of the deceased, as also on the date

¶18

[2025:RJ-JP:19201-DB]

¶19

[SAW-455/2025]

¶20

(2 of 2)

¶21

of making of the application do not provide for any such consideration once the relevant rules with regard to compassionate appointment as contained in Rule 7, 8, 9 & 10 of the Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependents of Deceased Government Servants Rules, 1996 (for short ‘Rules of 1996’) are read together. None of the rules provide that in case dependent who is willing to apply for compassionate appointment is minor, he would be entitled to be considered for compassionate appointment, upon attaining the age of majority, irrespective of the distance of time when the application is made. The age prescription and qualifications obviously would not be possessed by a minor. We also take note that earlier there existed such provision providing for consideration of the dependent of the deceased upon attaining majority but that rule has been done away vide Notification No.F.5(51)DOP/A-2/88 dated 11.09.2002.

¶22

In that view of the matter, learned Single Judge has not committed any legality in dismissing the writ petition.

¶23

The appeal is accordingly, dismissed.

¶24

(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J

¶25

(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),CJ

¶26

NAVAL Gandhi/Gaurav/41

Sunil Meena S/O Jagmohan Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sunil Meena S/O Jagmohan Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Rajasthan Vs Kanta D/O Shri Sheonarayan W/O Shri Subhas Chandra

Dr. Vishva Priya Sharma S/O Sh. Babu Lal Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

M/S Shri Ganpati Tubewell Company Vs State of Rajasthan

Sri Sai Scaffoldings Vs Deputy Commissioner

Suresh Kumar Dhaddha S/O Ghyan Chand Dhaddha Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

M/S Gurdeep Singh Chandi and Co. Vs State of Rajasthan