Rajasthan High Court
Anuj Sharma S/O Late Shri ... vs Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd on 1 November, 2022
Bench: Pankaj Mithal, Anoop Kumar Dhand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1119/2022
Anuj Sharma S/o Late Shri Jagannath Prasad Sharma, Aged
About 23 Years, R/o Mahadev Gali, Gadarpura, District Dholpur
(Raj.).
----Appellant
Versus
1. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Through Its Managing
Director, Vidyut Bhawan, Janpath, Jaipur - 302005 (Raj.)
2. The Assistant Engineer, (A-I), JVVNL, Machkund Choura
Dholpur (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Vigyan Shah with
Mr. Harendra Neel
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. PANKAJ MITHAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND
Order
01/11/2022
1. Heard Mr. Vigyan Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner-
appellant.
2. The father of the petitioner-appellant was working with the
Jaipur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited. He died in harness on
23.05.2008. The petitioner on attaining the age of maturity
applied for compassionate appointment on 20.02.2015. His
application for compassionate appointment was accepted and he
was given appointment on the post of Helper-I vide order dated
16.09.2015. The petitioner-appellant accepted the said
appointment and started functioning on the said post.
(2 of 2) [SAW-1119/2022]
3. After about four years thereafter, certain persons were given
compassionate appointment in similar situation on the post of
LDC, therefore, the petitioner filed a writ petition seeking that he
should not be discriminated and that he should also be appointed
on the post of LDC, rather than on the post of Helper-I. The writ
petition has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide
impugned judgment and order dated 01.08.2022 relying upon the
decision of the Supreme Court in the case of N.C. Santhosh Vs.
State of Karnataka & Ors, reported in (2020) 7 SCC 617,
wherein it has been held that once an appointment has been
made on any post under the compassionate rules, the benefit
intended under the Rules shall be deemed to have been availed
and the case shall not be reopened for appointment to any other
post under any circumstances.
4. The aforesaid decision clinches the issue raised by the
petitioner in the writ petition. Moreover, there is no question of
any discrimination being meeted out to the petitioner in view of
the fact that as on the date on which he was appointed as
Helper-1, no similarly situated person like the petitioner had been
given any appointment on any superior post such as LDC. The
grant of compassionate appointment to some other persons
subsequently after four years of the appointment of the petitioner
would not attract the principle of discrimination.
5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we are of
the opinion that the appeal lacks merit and it is accordingly
dismissed.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J (PANKAJ MITHAL),CJ
KAMLESH KUMAR/RAJAT/9
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
