Sunil Kumar Dubey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 September, 2023

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Sunil Kumar Dubey vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 September, 2023

Bench: Sujoy Paul

                                                            1
                          IN    THE        HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                        BEFORE
                                                   JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
                                            ON THE 11 th OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
                                            WRIT PETITION No. 22714 of 2023

                         BETWEEN:-
                         SUNIL KUMAR DUBEY S/O LATE RAJKUMAR DUBEY,
                         AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, OCCUPATION: UNEMPLOYED
                         VILLAGE DHABADONGRI POST MOHATARA TAHSIL
                         AND DISTRICT DINDORI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....PETITIONER
                         (BY SHRI A. P. PANDEY - ADVOCATE)

                         AND
                         1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH ITS
                               SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TRIBAL WELFARE
                               DEPARTMENT DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                         2.    ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TRIBAL WORK
                               D EPARTM EN T DINDORI DISTRICT DINDORI
                               (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         3.    BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER DINDORI DISTRICT
                               DINDORI (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                  .....RESPONDENTS
                         (BY SHRI ANKIT AGRAWAL - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

                               This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the
                         following:
                                                            ORDER

Heard on admission.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondents be directed to take a decision on his pending application for grant of compassionate appointment.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANJU Signing time: 9/12/2023 12:43:44 PM 2

3. The petitioner's father died in harness on 23/12/2017. In Para-4 of the petition, it is mentioned that 'there is no delay in filing the petition'.

4. On a specific query from the Bench, learned consel for the petitioner submits that document dated 12/01/2018 (Annexure P/4) takes care of the delay. I am not impressed with this argument for the simple reason that very purpose of grant of compassionate appointment is to provide an immediate help to the family in crises. The father of the petitioner died in the year 2017. There is no explanation of delay of almost 5 years and six months. The document dated 12/01/2018 does not explain the delay from January 2018 till fining of this petition.

5. The delay is enormous and defeats the very purpose of grant of compassionate appointment. [See : Umesh Kumar nagpal v. State of Haryana (1994) 4 SCC 138, State of J & K v. Sajad Ahmed Mir, (2006) 5 SCC 766, State of H. P. v. Shashi Kumar and (2019) 3 SCC 653, State of W.B. v. Debabrata Tiwari 2023 SCC OnLine SC 219].

6. In this view of the matter, no case is made out for admission. The Writ Petition is dismissed.

(SUJOY PAUL) JUDGE manju Signature Not Verified Signed by: MANJU Signing time: 9/12/2023 12:43:44 PM

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court