Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
In this case of Yogesh Nagraoji Ugale versus State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary & Ors, a civil appeal was filed to challenge the final Judgment and Order dated 19.11.2014 passed in W.P. No. 3520 of 2014 by the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court, whereby the Writ Petition was dismissed. In this case the father of the Appellant – Late Shri Nagraoji Ugale was working as a Peon (Class IV) with the School run by the Nagpur Pradesh Education Society. While he was in service, the father of the Appellant suddenly expired of a heart attack on 13.10.2012. Since the father of the Appellant was the only breadwinner in the family, the Appellant filed an Application for Compassionate appointment on 29.10.2012.
This was followed up by further letters on 30.10.2012 and 31.10.2012. Respondent No. 2 – the Education Officer vide letter dated 06.05.2013 called upon the Appellant for a hearing on 17.05.2013 to consider the application for appointment on Compassionate Grounds. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 remained absent from the hearing on 17.05.2013, which was rescheduled for 31.05.2013. The Respondent No. 2 – the Education Officer vide Order dated 31.05.2013 recorded that the President of the Society was ready to grant compassionate appointment to the Appellant, if the Education Officer grants the permission. The Education Officer recorded that the Appellant possessed the educational qualification of S.S.C. and had passed the computer examination MSCIT.
Furthermore, there were two Schools being run by the Nagpur Pradesh Education Society, and each of the Schools had one post of Junior Clerk vacant. The Education Officer directed that the proposal for approval be submitted to his office within one month. In response, Respondent No. 3 issued a communication dated 13.07.2013 to the Education Officer stating that a Government Resolution dated 22.03.2012 contemplates a ban on recruitment on nonteaching employees on compassionate ground, which was relaxed in respect of the waitlist candidates prior to 31.12.2011.
The Government of Maharashtra vide Resolution dated 22.03.2012 Financial Development, continued the ban imposed on 22.08.2005 for recruitment of posts in ‘Group C and Group D’ cadres in Government Departments/Offices and Government Aided Institutions with a view to control the administrative expenditure on the Recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission. The Recruitment ban on candidates in the compassionate list after 22.08.2005 was continued. The Government vide Resolution dated 22.03.2012 relaxed the ban for candidates in the waiting list of appointments on compassionate ground till 31.12.2011.
The Government of Maharashtra vide Resolution dated 01.03.2014 revised decision dated 22.08.2005 which had restricted recruitment to 5% in Group ‘C’ and ‘D’ on the basis of compassionate appointment, and increased the limit to 10% of posts. Since the representations of the Appellant were not granted,was filed by the Appellant before the High Court, praying inter alia for the issuance of a direction to Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to appoint the Appellant on compassionate grounds. The High Court vide final Judgment and Order dated 19.11.2014 held that the relief sought by the Appellant cannot be granted. The Appellant could not be appointed on compassionate grounds since the family of the Appellant had received monetary benefits of Rs. 7,50,000/towards the statutory dues of the deceased i.e. Provident Fund, Gratuity and Leave Encashment.
It was also held that the mother ofthe Appellant was receiving a monthly pension of Rs. 11,030/. The High Court dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the Appellant. Subsequently the appellant filed an appeal in the Supreme Court, the court after hearing the case held “ In the facts and circumstances of the present case, we allow the Appeal, and set aside the Judgment passed by the High Court on 19.11.2014 in W.P. No. 3520 of 2014. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are directed to submit the proposal for appointment of the Appellant before the Respondent No. 2 – the Education Officer within one month, so that necessary orders can be passed on the application of the appellant. Ordered accordingly. Pending applications, if any, are accordingly disposed of.”
86540
103860
630
114
59824