Writ Petition No. 207 of 2016. Case: Pawan Vs The State of Maharashtra and Ors.. High Court of Bombay (India)
| Case Number | Writ Petition No. 207 of 2016 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: A.S. Deshmukh, Advocate and For Respondents: P.G. Borale, AGP |
| Judges | S. S. Shinde and P. R. Bora, JJ. |
| Issue | Constitution of India - Articles 14, 16; Indian Succession Act, 1925 - Sections 372, 383 |
| Judgement Date | January 25, 2016 |
| Court | High Court of Bombay (India) |
Judgment:
S. S. Shinde, J.
-
This Petition takes exception to the Judgment and Order dated 12th December, 2014, passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai, Bench at Aurangabad in Original Application No. 693/2012, and also seeks directions to the respondent No. 2 to consider the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground.
-
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, the father of the petitioner died, during the course of employment of the respondent No. 2, on 24th March, 1995. He invited our attention to the provisions of the Government Resolution dated 8th March, 1985, and submits that, the legal heirs of the deceased, who are willing to apply on compassionate ground, can apply within 5 years from death for appointment on compassionate ground. He further invited our attention to the provisions of the Government Resolution dated 11th September, 1996, and submits that, if the legal heirs of the deceased employee are minor at the time of death of Government employee, in view of the provisions of the said Government Resolution, said minors, after attaining the age of majority, can apply within one year for the appointment on compassionate ground. It is submitted that, the deceased Dinkar has left behind him his legally wedded wife namely Chandrakalabai, minor son -petitioner and one minor daughter. Smt. Chandrakalabai widow of Dinkar Palaskar [deceased], within one month from his death, filed the application with the respondent No. 2 for appointment on compassionate ground. It is submitted that, one Smt. Ushabai, claiming to be the legally wedded wife of deceased Dinkar, filed MARJI No. 154/1995, in the Court of Civil Judge Junior Division, Aurangabad, for grant of succession certificate under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act. Said Ushabai had two sons and one daughter. Eventually, the daughter died in an accident and both the sons were minor at the time of filing of proceedings under the Successions Act. The concerned Court allowed the application of Smt. Ushabai, and succession certificate was issued in her favour on 19th July, 1995, and accordingly, she also filed an application for appointment on compassionate ground.
-
Being aggrieved by the decision in MARJI No. 154/1995, Smt. Chandrakalabai filed MARJI No. 256/1995 under Section 383 of the Indian Succession Act. In the said proceedings, the Court revoked the succession certificate granted in favour of Ushabai. Said Smt. Ushabai feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the decision, revoking her succession certificate, preferred Regular Civil Appeal No. 311/2000, challenging the revocation of succession certificate granted in her favour. However, said Appeal came to be dismissed. Being aggrieved by the said Judgment and Decree, Smt. Ushabai filed Civil Revision Application No. 238/2004 before the High Court. The High Court, on 20th June, 2005, rejected said Civil Revision Application. However, while rejecting the said Civil Revision Application, parties were given liberty to take an appropriate remedy for redressal of their grievance.
-
It is further submitted that, prior to the decision of the High Court in the said Civil Revision Application, Smt. Chandrakalabai informed by letter dated 8th July, 2001, by the respondent No. 2 that, unless Civil Revision Application is finally decided by the High Court, her case for appointment on compassionate ground cannot be considered. It is further submitted that, on 24th July, 2007, the parties have amicably settled the dispute between the parties, and accordingly, compromise deed was prepared between Ushabai and Chandrakalabai with the respective sons and daughters and the same was verified before the Civil Judge Junior Division, Aurangabad, accepting compromise, and accordingly, the proceedings were disposed off.
-
It is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that, in view of the said compromise, all monetary benefits were to be given to Ushabai and her legal heirs and as far as appointment on compassionate ground is concerned, in the said compromise deed, it was agreed that, none of the legal heirs of the family members of Dinkar Palaskar are in Government service, and since the petitioner is elder son of Dinkar Palaskar, it was agreed that, he should apply with the respondent No. 2 for the employment on compassionate ground and none of the parties should create any problems for him.
It is submitted that, in due course of proceedings, Smt. Chandrakalabai had become age barred, and therefore, she could not proceed with her application on compassionate ground, and all other benefits...
To continue reading
Request your trial