Yogesh S/O Kishore Dandekar vs Zilla Parishad, Wardha Through ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3221 Bom

1-J-WP-7887-17.odt                                                                          1/3


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

                               WRIT PETITION NO.7887 OF 2017


Yogesh S/o Kishore Dandekar,
Aged about 18 years,
R/o Datta Ward, Arvi,
Tah. Arvi, Dist. Wardha

-vs-

Zilla Parishad, Wardha,
Thr. its Chief Executive Officer,
Wardha


Shri N. R. Saboo, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri N. M. Kolhe, Advocate for respondent.

CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND M. W. CHANDWANI JJ. DATE : March 30, 2023

Oral Judgment (Per : A. S. Chandurkar, J.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned

counsel for the parties.

The application made by the petitioner for grant of

compassionate appointment on 02/02/2017 has been rejected by the

Zilla Parishad on the ground that the petitioner is the son from the

second marriage of his father and as that marriage is not valid under the

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, the Act of 1955), the claim of the

petitioner cannot be considered.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has invited our attention

to the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in Union of India vs.

1-J-WP-7887-17.odt 2/3

V. R. Tripathi 2018 SCC OnLine SC 3097 wherein it has been held that

in view of Section 16 (1) of the Act of 1955, a child born from a

marriage which is null and void under Section Section 11 is a legitimate

child. The claim for grant of compassionate appointment by such

legitimate child cannot be rejected on the ground that he/she is an

offspring from a void marriage. This decision has been subsequently

followed in Girija Suresh Borade and ors. vs. Union of India and ors.

2019(5) Mh.L.J. 222. It is thus submitted that the rejection of the

petitioner's application on 06/12/2019 is contrary to law.

3. The learned counsel for the respondent by referring to the

affidavit in reply submits that an earlier application filed by the first

wife was rejected by the Zilla Parishad after which the subsequent

application dated 02/02/2017 was moved by the petitioner. Since the

death of the father had occurred on 23/03/2003 there was no case for

grant of compassionate appointment.

4. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we find that the

only reason for rejecting the petitioner's application is that he is an

offspring from a void marriage. In view of the decision of the

Honourable Supreme Court in V. R. Tripathi (supra), this conclusion is

incorrect. The petitioner is a legitimate child and therefore the

application made by him is required to be considered on its own merits.

1-J-WP-7887-17.odt 3/3

The same was not liable to be rejected for the reasons mentioned in the

impugned communication.

5. For aforesaid reasons, the following order is passed :

(i) The communication dated 06/12/2019 issued by the Zilla

Parishad is set aside.

(ii) The Zilla Parishad is directed to re-consider the petitioner's

application dated 02/02/2017 on its own merits after

considering all relevant aspects. A decision thereon be taken

within a period of eight weeks from the receipt of copy of this

judgment.

(iii) All points on merits are kept open.

The Writ Petition is partly allowed. Rule accordingly.

No order as to costs.

(M. W. Chandwani, J.) (A. S. Chandurkar, J.)

Asmita