SCA/5682/2007 1/3 ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5682 of 2007

=========================================================
ASHOK KAMABHAI CHAUDHARY - Petitioner(s)
Versus
THE CHIEF SCIENTIST & 3 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR TEJAS M BAROT for Petitioner(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 1 - 4.
=========================================================
CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD

Date : 02/03/2007

ORAL ORDER

Heard the learned advocate Mr. TM Barot on

behalf of the petitioner.

In pursuance to the Court's direction,

representation was made by the petitioner with a
prayer to reconsider the case of petitioner for
compassionate appointment, which was rejected by
order dated 2/2/2007 on the ground that there was no
scheme applicable in favour of the petitioner, which
provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner.

Learned advocate Mr. Barot submitted that this

Court has directed to the otherside to reconsider the
matter of the petitioner, which has been rejected by
the respondent. This Court has passed an order in
SCA 1164/2002 on 2/12/2006.

Downloaded on : Fri May 21 17:13:13 IST 2021

SCA/5682/2007 2/3 ORDER

The respondent has rejected the claim of

petitioner for compassionate appointment on the basis
of various Government Resolution including the
resolution dated 17/10/1988. Ultimately, in para 9,
specifically made it clear that, there is no
provision made in Government Resolution dated
17/10/1988, which provide compassionate appointment
to dependent of such employee, those who were getting
various benefits under Government Resolution dated
17/10/1988.

It is also made clear by Government Resolution

dated 27/1/1992 that in case of death of daily wager
employee working on fixed salary, there is no
provision made to provide compassionate appointment.

Similarly, in policy of Government Resolution

dated 10/3/2000 also it is made clear that daily
wagers are not covered by the benefit of
compassionate appointment.

Therefore, the decision has been taken by the

respondent, that in absence of policy, petitioner is
not entitled for the benefit of compassionate
appointment. I have perused the order passed by the
respondent.

Recently, Apex Court has also considered the

same aspect in case of National Institution of
Technology & Ors. Vs. Niraj Kumar Singh reported in

Downloaded on : Fri May 21 17:13:13 IST 2021

SCA/5682/2007 3/3 ORDER

2007 (2) SCALE, page 525, relevant para 14 is quoted

as under :

“A appointment on compassionate ground would

be illegal in absence of any scheme providing
therefore. Such scheme must be commensurate
with the constitutional scheme of equality.”

Therefore, in view of the above observation made

by Apex Court and considering that there was no
scheme available which providing compassionate
appointment to the petitioner, respondent is
justified in taking decision.

Therefore, decision taken by the respondent is

perfectly justified, legal and valid. No
interference is required by this Court while
exercising the power under Art. 227of the
Constitution of India.

Hence, there is no substance in this present

petition. Accordingly, present petition is dismissed
of.

(H.K.RATHOD, J)

asma

Downloaded on : Fri May 21 17:13:13 IST 2021