Delay in compassionate appointment by government causing more grief to the family is unjustifiable: Bombay High Court

By - Pavni Dada*

A 30-year-old widow lady whose husband worked as a peon at the Sant Dyaneshwar Vidyalaya in Parbhani initiated the plea. Her husband died in an accident on June 8, 2017, after working for 19 years in the company. On a compassionate basis, she was appointed as a peon in her husband's company.

The approval for the act was awaited, but it was later denied vide order dated 14.03.1018, stating that the problem of sanctioning the staffing pattern for the non-teaching role is still under consideration by the government and the petitioner's appointment on compassionate grounds cannot be taken into account.

It is also said in the affidavit that unless the Government sanctioned the staffing pattern of non-teaching employees and there is no policy decision on the same, a fresh appointment on a non-teaching post cannot be approved.

Also Read - Clear and specific legal framework needed for cases involving 'sex on false promise of marriage': Allahabad High Court.

The Bombay High Court bench at Aurangabad observed that the appointment on compassionate grounds is not only a humanitarian act but is also intended to provide urgent relief to a family in distress who has unexpectedly lost the sole bread earner and is on the verge of starving. Any action by the government to delay a compassionate appointment, causing more grief to the family, is unjustifiable.

Accordingly, the bench directed the Education Offcer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Parbhani to approve the compassionate appointment of the petitioner-widow on or before 31.08.2021 and quashed the impugned order dated 14.03.2018.

Also Read - Pegasus Row: Supreme Court says allegations are serious if reports are true.

“The impugned order which is unreasoned and cryptic, cannot be sustained, it being beyond logic and reason….The impugned order dated 14.03.2018 stands quashed and set aside.”, the court held.

CLICK HERE TO READ JUDGMENT.

*Pavni Dada is a 1^st year student pursuing B.B.A.LL.B from Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad.

Comments

Patna High Court Declares Bihar’s Reservation Amendments Ultra Vires

In a landmark decision, the Patna High Court has invalidated the Bihar government's legislative attempt to increase reservations for backward classes. The court's ruling focused on procedural flaws and the absence of a robust empirical basis for the hike, sparking a debate on judicial intervention in affirmative action policies. Background and Rationale Behind Setting Aside Bihar Reservation Increase Law The Bihar government had proposed an increase in reservations to address socio-economic disparities faced by backward classes. However, the court found that the state failed to follow due process, which includes conducting a thorough empirical study to justify the policy change. This procedural oversight led to the court's decision to strike down the increase. The High Court emphasized the necessity of a data-driven approach for policy changes related to reservations. The ruling underscored that without solid empirical evidence, such policies could not be justified within...

Pune Porsche Crash: Father of Minor Granted Bail

Image Credit: tv9marathi A Pune court has granted bail to the minor’s father, Vishal Agarwal, who faced charges under the Juvenile Justice Act for neglect and endangering the child by allowing him to drive without a license and consume alcohol. Additionally, bar owners and managers were arrested for serving alcohol to minors. The father, already in custody for other related charges, was implicated in the alleged manipulation of his son’s blood samples and in a separate case of kidnapping his driver. Advocate Prashant Patil argued that Vishal Agarwal's arrest was unlawful, contending that the charges were non-cognizable offenses and required a notice under the Criminal Procedure Code. Mr. Patil also highlighted contradictions in police reports, where the minor was listed as the accused in one FIR and as a victim in another. Also Read: Delhi High Court Stays Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's Bail in Excise Policy Case Earlier Proceedings in the Pune Porsche Crash Inc...

Counsel's failure to argue written submissions is not a ground of review: Bombay High Court

By - Sameeksha Negi* The Bombay High Court has observed that “If Counsel has not urged a point, the fact that there were written submissions is immaterial if those written submissions were never in fact argued.” The Bench also added that “Counsel’s failure to argue written submissions is not a ground of review or, I dare say, even appeal. It is no ground to assail any order of any judge of any court.” The bench was hearing a review petition filed for seeking reinstatement of original arbitration petition on grounds some of which were never argued and others never pleaded and the said petition was filed after the original arbitration petition was fully argued, and then decided by pronouncement in open court. Also Read - The Pension Scheme for freedom fighters cannot be construed in a manner that the requirements prescribed are rendered a dead letter: Bombay HC According to Justice GS Patel allowing parties to take grounds in review pleas or in appeals that were not argued initi...

Lawgic Simplified

Search This Blog