Gujarat High Court
Asodiya Hareshkumar Babulal vs State Of Gujarat & 3 on 27 April, 2017
Author: R.Subhash Reddy
Bench: R.Subhash Reddy, Vipul M. Pancholi
C/LPA/706/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 706 of 2017
In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6528 of 2012
==========================================================
ASODIYA HARESHKUMAR BABULAL....Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 3....Respondents
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SL VAISHYA, ADVOCATE for Appellant
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. R.SUBHASH
REDDY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI
Date : 27/04/2017
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. R.SUBHASH REDDY)
1. This Letters Patent Appeal under Clause-15 of the Letters Patent is filed by the original petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 6528 of 2012, aggrieved by the order dated 12th June, 2012 passed by the learned single Judge.
2. The appellant-original petitioner filed Special Civil Application No. 6528 of 2012 with the prayers which read as under:
"(A) Your Lordships be pleased to allow this petition. (B) Your Lordships may allow and consider the application dated 13.8.2007 at annex.'A' which is Page 1 of 4 HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Wed Aug 16 07:28:14 IST 2017 C/LPA/706/2017 ORDER submitted to the respondent to give the service on compassionate basis to the petitioner according to G.R. Dated 29.3.2007 and dated 25.4.2007 (at Annex."H"
Colly).
(C) Your Lordships may kindly be pleased to order and direct the respondents to compassionate in cash payment as per as per rules to the petitioner as a alternative remedy.(sic) (D) Your Lordships may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents that the petitioner is entitled for compassionate service as per the application dated 13.8.2007 Schedule-2 at annex.A, as the new G.R. is not applicable to the petitioner, the G.r. Dated 5.7.2011 which is mentioned in letter dated 29.9.2011 at Annex.A in the collective annexures.(sic) (E) Any other and further relief/s which deems fit, proper and just be granted in the interest of justice."
3. It is the case of the appellant that his father was appointed as Tracer on 19.5.1983 in the office of Deputy Executive Engineer, Road and Building Construction, Sub-Division, Bhabhar. It appears that his father expired on 23.6.2007 while in service. Pursuant to his father's death, the appellant-petitioner made an application on 13th August, 2007, seeking appointment on compassionate ground. After making such application on 13th August, 2007, the appellant-petitioner filed Special Civil Application No. 6528 of 2012 on the ground that his claim for compassionate appointment was not considered by the respondent authorities.
Page 2 of 4 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Wed Aug 16 07:28:14 IST 2017 C/LPA/706/2017 ORDER
4. It is the further case of the appellant that the learned single Judge, without going into the merits of the claim of the appellant, dismissed the petition in limine on the ground of delay by placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shiv Dass v. Union of India & Ors., AIR 2007 SC 1330.
5. In this appeal, it is contended by learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner that though application for compassionate appointment was submitted by the appellant within time, that is, on 13th August, 2007 after the death of the father of the appellant on 23rd June, 2007, the respondent authorities did not decide his application till the date of filing of the petition and in that view of the matter, no delay can be attributed on the part of the appellant.
6. The concept of compassionate appointment is based with avowed object to grant immediate relief to the bereaved family members of the deceased Government servant who dies suddenly in harness. The appellant's father expired on 23rd June, 2007 and he made application for compassionate appointment on 13th August, 2007. However, he did not pursue the application with the respondent authorities and filed petition after waiting for about five years. Therefore, the learned single Judge dismissed the petition filed by the appellant-petitioner by order dated 12th June, 2012 on the ground of delay. It appears that even thereafter, the appellant- Page 3 of 4 HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Wed Aug 16 07:28:14 IST 2017 C/LPA/706/2017 ORDER petitioner has not pursued the matter vigilantly.
7. As per the material placed on record, the age of the appellant-
petitioner at the time of making application for compassionate appointment was 23 years and by now he will be around 33 years old. After making application for compassionate appointment, the appellant did not pursue the matter when the respondents did not decide his application and only in the year 2012, after a period of about 5 years, he approached this Court by filing Special Civil Application. Keeping in mind such inordinate delay in approaching this Court and having regard to the reasons stated by the learned single Judge in the order impugned, we are in agreement with the view taken by the learned single Judge.
8. The Letters Patent Appeal is, therefore, devoid of merit and the same is accordingly dismissed.
(R. SUBHASH REDDY, CJ) (VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.) pirzada Page 4 of 4 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Wed Aug 16 07:28:14 IST 2017