Ku. Puja D/O Pralhad Bucche vs Govt. Of Maha. Through Principal ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 4673 Bom

Judgment                          1              17-W.P.No.8476.2019.odt



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                     NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                 WRIT PETITION NO.8476 OF 2019


      Ku. Puja D/o Pralhad Bucche,
      Aged about 23 years, Occu. - Nil,
      R/o. Suraksha Nagar, Bhadrawati,
      Tah. Bhadrawati, Distt. Chandrapur.
                                                .... PETITIONER

                            // VERSUS //

1)    Government of Maharashtra,
      Through it's Principal Secretary,
      General Administration Department,
      Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032.

2)    Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur,
      through Chief Executive Officer,
      Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur,
      Tah. & Dist. Chandrapur.

3)    Smt. Anita Wd/o Pralhad Bucche,
      Aged about 50 years, Occ. Household,
      R/o. Suraksha Nagar, Bhadrawati,
      Tah. Bhadrawati, Distt. Chandrapur.
                                             .... RESPONDENTS
______________________________________________________________
     Mr. Rishi D. Narkhede, Advocate for the petitioner.
     Mr. N.R. Patil, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent
     No.1.
     Ms. Gayatri M. Reve, Advocate for respondent No.2.
______________________________________________________________

                  CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
                          SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, JJ.

DATED : 02.05.2022

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per Sunil B. Shukre, J.) Judgment 2 17-W.P.No.8476.2019.odt

1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally

by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. The father of the petitioner, who was an Extension Officer

in Panchayat Samiti died on 24.01.2009 and immediately after his

death, name of respondent No.3, the mother of the petitioner and

widow of the deceased was included in the waiting list of the

candidates seeking compassionate appointment. Later on, as the

petitioner turned major, name of the petitioner was substituted for

name of respondent No.3, as the candidate seeking compassionate

appointment. Her name was so substituted on 01.01.2015.

3. Now the question is, whether on 01.01.2015, there was

any prohibition on substitution of the name in the waiting list of the

candidates seeking compassionate appointments and the answer has to

be provided as in the negative. Such prohibition came into force only

in the year 2015, when the Government Resolution dated 20.05.2015

was issued. But, the prohibition which was brought into force

subsequently has now been applied to the case of the petitioner and

once again, her name in the waiting list has been substituted by the

name of respondent No.3, which is not permissible in the law. This is

also the view taken consistently by this Court in the case of Pushpabai

Rajesh Bisne and ors Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. in Writ Petition Judgment 3 17-W.P.No.8476.2019.odt

No.5944 of 2018 decided on 22.07.2019 and also the case of Sumit

Bhojraj Kamde and ors. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and ors. , in Writ

Petition No.2014 of 2019 decided on 07.10.2020.

4. Thus, the impugned order has to be held as illegal. The

petition is, therefore, allowed and impugned order is hereby quashed

and set aside. The position which obtained on 01.01.2015, which

showed the name of the petitioner at Sr.No.32 in the waiting list of the

candidates seeking compassionate appointment, is restored with

immediate effect.

5. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs.

(SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) (SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.)

Kavita

Signed By:KAVITA PRAVIN TAYADE P. A.

Signing Date:02.05.2022 18:34