Javed Abbas Khatik vs Executive Director Mah State ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 7595 Bom

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD
                        WRIT PETITION NO.8057 OF 2011

Javed Abbas Khatik,
Age : 26 years, Occ. Nil,
r/o. Jamda, Tq.Chalisgaon,
Dist. Jalgaon                                             ..Petitioner

                  Vs.

Executive Director,
Maharashtra State Electricity
Distribution Company Ltd.,
Prakash Garh, Bandra East,
Mumbai - 400 051                                          ..Respondent

                                           ----
Mr.M.U.Shelke, Advocate                i/b. Mr.Sharad     Natu,      Advocate          for
Petitioner
Mr.A.S.Bajaj, Advocate for respondent - sole
                                ----

                                    CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH AND
                                            SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : SEPTEMBER 26, 2017

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.) :

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally

with consent of counsel for parties.

2. The petitioner prays for following reliefs :-

(A) By issuance of writ of mandamus or writ or

direction in like nature, the respondent be directed

to issue appointment order on compassionate basis

in favour of the petitioner;

                                                  2                                   wp-8057-11



                   (B)     By issuance of writ of mandamus or writ or direction

in like nature, the respondent be directed to comply

with their own communication dated 29.5.2003 and

accordingly pay the amount of compensation as

stated in their own communication and petitioner

may be allowed to withdraw the same.

3. The father of the petitioner, who had been working as a

Lineman/Helper with the respondent, sustained 90% disability and

consequently, died during the course of employment on 23.05.1987.

Mother of the petitioner had requested for appointment on

compassionate ground before the Industrial Court. That complaint,

however, was held to be not tenable by the Industrial Court.

4. In the affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondent, it is stated

that under the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act, legal

heirs were entitled to get Rs.78,466/- towards compensation. The

respondent had deposited said sum in the Labour Court on

01.08.1999, which had been withdrawn by the mother of petitioner

namely, Hajrabai Abbas Khatik.

5. The respondent has further clarified the position about

making deposit of compensation amount to the tune of Rs.2,32,479/-

3 wp-8057-11

was in view of the compliance of the judgment in favour of one Yuvraj

Radho Mahajan and it was paid to said Yuvraj. It is further stated in the

affidavit that by mistake, officer of the respondent communicated the

petitioner about deposit of said amount as death compensation in

respect of death of his father. The claim of the petitioner based on the

said communication as such would not be proper and not payable.

6. Mother of the petitioner has already received the amount

pursuant to Workmen's Compensation Act. In the facts and

circumstances of the case and having regard to above as petitioner's

mother has withdrawn that amount of compensation, in our opinion,

the claim for amount is rendered untenable. It does not appear that

petitioner could have been appointed looking at his age that was while

his father had died. His mother does not appear to have pursued her

claim for appointment on compassionate ground after she failed to

secure relief before Industrial Court. Even otherwise petition would not

carry any fruitful purpose after thirty years of death of the employee.

Looking to the nature of the petition and in view of the affidavit-in-

reply filed on behalf of the respondent, the Writ Petition stands

dismissed and disposed of.

[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.] kbp