Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mahesh Kumar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through ... on 16 April, 2025
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:10036
1 WP-15057-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 16th OF APRIL, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 15057 of 2024
MAHESH KUMAR
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Arvind Parmar - advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Anand Bhatt - GA for the State.
ORDER
The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India challenging order dated 05.10.2023 (Annexure-P/1) and order dated
24.04.2024 (Annexure-P/2) by which the representation of the petitioner for
grant of compassionate appointment has been rejected on the ground that
petitioner was not having educational qualification for the post of Samvidha
Shala Shikshak Grade-III and on the ground petitioner had received an
amount of Rs.1 Lac in view of the compassionate appointment.
2. This is second visit of the petitioner before this court. Earlier he
filed WP No.5606/2023 which was disposed off by this Court by order dated
16.03.2023 with the following directions:-
" By this petition, the petitioner has prayed
for the following reliefs:-
1. It is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble may
be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or
direction to the respondents to give
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:10036
2 WP-15057-2024
compassionate appointment to the petitioner
on any suitable post as per his qualifications
and entitlement.
2. That, the writ petition may kindly be
allowed with cost.
3. That, any other relief which this Hon'ble
Court deem fit may grant to the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner has submitted an
application on 08.03.2019 (Annexure P/7)
before the respondents for his appointment on
compassionate basis. All the requisite
documents as had been desired by
respondents have also been submitted before
them to enable them to decide the application
of the petitioner but despite lapse of a period
of almost four years, the application has
remained pending and has not been decided.
A prayer has been made for a direction for
decision of aforesaid application
expeditiously.
Learned counsel for the respondents submits
that the application submitting by the
petitioner shall be decided in accordance
with law.
In view of the aforesaid, I deem it fit and
proper to direct to respondents/competent
authority to advert to and decide petitioner's
case for appointment on compassionate basis
as submitted by him by way of his
application dated 08.03.2019 (Annexure P/7)
within a period of 60 days from the date of
receipt of certified copy of this order in
accordance with law.
With the aforesaid direction, without
expressing any opinion on merits, instant
petition stands disposed off."
3. After the said order the District Education Officer, Rajgarh
(Biaora) has passed the impugned order dated 05.10.2023 and rejected the
application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment on the ground
that the petitioner was not having requisite educational qualification for
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:10036
3 WP-15057-2024
appointment.
4. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the application
dated 08.03.2019 (Annexure-P/9) the petitioner has not prayed for
compassionate appointment on any specific post. He had mentioned in the
said application that he may be given compassionate appointment on any
post. He argued that in case, if the petitioner has not having educational
qualification for the post of Class-III, the respondents ought to have
considered his case for compassionate appointment as per clause 5.4 of the
policy dated dated 29.09.2014. He also relied on a judgment passed by this
Court in WP No.5271/2024 (Hina Kausar Vs. The State of M.P. and others)
decided on 13.08.2024 whereby this Court directed the respondents to
reconsider the case of the said petitioner on Class-IV post as per Clause 5.4
of circular dated 29.09.2014.
5. Counsel for the State supported the impugned order and submitted
that father of the petitioner died on 27.12.2006 and since he was not found to
be eligible for appointment, Rs. 1 Lac was paid as compensation which has
been withdrawn by the wife of the deceased employee. Further, the employee
had died in the year 2006 and after such a long period, the application for
compassionate appointment cannot be considered as the same would defeat
the purpose of compassionate appointment.
6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the
order passed by this Court dated 16.03.2023 in WP No.5606/2024, it is
pellucid that this Court directed to consider the application dated 08.03.2019
for compassionate appointment filed by the petitioner.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:10036
4 WP-15057-2024
7. Upon perusal of application dated 08.03.2019 (Annexure- P/9) it is
noticed that the petitioner had clearly stated in the application that petitioner
is interested for employment on any post in the department. Thus despite
order passed by this Court, the competent authority has failed to consider the
application 08.03.2019 (Annexure-P/9) in a proper prospective. If the
petitioner was not eligible for Class-III post, the competent authority ought
to have considered his case for Class-IV post in accordance with the law.
8. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned order dated 05.10.2023 and
24.04.2014 are quashed. The competent authority is directed to consider the
application of the petitioner dated 08.03.2019 for compassionate
appointment on Class-IV post as per Clause 5.4 of circular dated 29.09.2014
within a period of two months from the date of filing of the order.
9.With the aforesaid, petition is allowed and stands disposed off.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
JUDGE
ajit
