Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bharat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 November, 2021
Author: Vivek Rusia
- : 1 :-
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE
(SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA)
WRIT PETITION NO.25252/2021
Bharat s/o Gopalkrishan Prajapat Age: 24 years, Occ: unemployed r/o
33/3 Ganeshpura Maksi Road, Ujjain (M.P.)
Applicant.
Versus
1. State of Madhya Pradesh through Sachib Lok Nirman Vibhag
Ballabh Bhavan, Bhopal M.P.
2. Mukhya Abhiyantra, Lok Nirman Vibhag Dashara medan, Ujjain,
M.P.
Dated: 24/11/2021:
Shri Mahesh Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Chetan Jain, learned Panel lawyer for the respondent-State.
*****
Heard.
Petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 12/10/2018
(annexure P-7), whereby respondent No.2 has rejected his claim for
compassionate appointment.
According to the petitioner, his father late Shri Gopal Krishna
Prajapat died on 10/12/2015 while working as contingency employee in
the Public Works Department, Ujjain. He submitted his claim for
compassionate appointment under the policy dated 29 th September, 2014.
Vide circular dated 31/08/2016, the aforesaid policy has been
amended by which instead of Rs. 02 lacs as ex-gratia compensation, one
of the family member of contingency paid employee is held entitled for
compassionate appointment. Despite the aforesaid policy, respondent
No.2 has dismissed the claim of the petitioner. Hence, present petition
has been filed.
The Hon'ble Apex Court in the recent judgment dated 18/11/2021
passed in the case of State of M.P. Vs. Ashish Awasthi in Civil Appeal
No.6903/2021 has considered the policy dated 29 th September, 2014
issued by the General Administration Department, State of M.P. and held
that the policy prevailing at the time of death of an employee shall apply
for considering the claim of compassionate appointment and the claim in
- : 2 :-
respect of compassionate appointment under the policy dated 31/08/2016
has been denied.
Since the father of the petitioner died on 10/12/2015 and at that
time, policy dated 29th September, 2014 was invogue, therefore, the case
of the petitioner has rightly been considered and rejected by the
respondent. However, the said policy provides for payment of Rs.02 lacs
as ex-gratia compensation in lieu of the compassionate appointment.
While rejecting the claim of the petitioner for compassionate
appointment, respondent did not consider the aforesaid claim in resepct
of ex-gratia compensation hence, the matter is remitted back to the
respondent to consider the claim of Smt. Basanti Bai w/o Shri Gopal
Krishna Prajapat in respect of ex-gratia compensation and decide it in
accordance with law.
Petition stand disposed of accordingly.
( VIVEK RUSIA )
JUDGE
vc
VARSH
Digitally signed by VARSHA
CHATURVEDI
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF
MADHYA PRADESH BENCH
INDORE, ou=HIGH COURT OF
A
MADHYA PRADESH BENCH
INDORE, postalCode=452001,
st=Madhya Pradesh,
2.5.4.20=df59fbf0f5c7485addc8af
CHATU
fe3edf20e67d11d7f91045d81139f
6792fbd4ae91f,
pseudonym=F29DF1B77616273C
6A0CF86F33868DF0D9382C30,
serialNumber=652FE82BC5CAE81
RVEDI
53A1E34C3B8EFC095F5A0D144B
089415F31342D1C8E2D3139,
cn=VARSHA CHATURVEDI
Date: 2021.11.25 17:34:41 +05'30'
