Madhya Pradesh High Court
Secretary State Of M.P. And Anr. vs Mehmood Hussain Mansuri on 25 June, 2014
---1---
Writ Appeal No.729/2013
25/06/2014
Ms. Mini Ravindran, Dy. Government Advocate for the
appellants/State.
Shri L.R. Bhatnagar, Advocate for the respondent.
Heard counsel for the parties.
This appeal takes exception to the decision of the learned Single Judge dated 3rd October, 2012, in Writ Petition No.209/2009, whereby writ petition filed by the respondent was allowed and the order passed by the District Education Officer dated 22.1.2008 has been set aside.
The learned Single Judge has noted that the sole reason recorded in rejecting the application for grant of compassionate appointment was that the brother of the respondent was working as "Shiksha Karmi". The learned Single Judge has adverted to the decision of the Division Bench of this Court which has held that "Shiksha Karmi" is not a Government servant.
Even if we were to agree with the submission of the appellants that working as 'Shiksha Karmi' in local body would be covered by the expression contained in the policy, namely, Shashkiya Seva or Corporation, Council, Commission etc. to include local bodies and where person is
---2---
employed as "Shiksha Karmi", the fact as to whether the brother of the respondent was residing with the family or otherwise would still be a matter to be examined by the District Education Officer. Inasmuch as, if it is found as of fact that the brother of respondent was staying separately and not with the family of the respondent and other dependents of the deceased-employee and that they have no financial support from any other source, in that eventuality, the application of the respondent for grant of compassionate appointment would still be maintainable and ought to be considered on its own merits.
In this view of the matter, no interference is warranted with the operative order passed by the learned Single Judge.
Disposed of accordingly.
(A. M. Khanwilkar) (Shantanu Kemkar)
Chief Justice Judge
DV