Judgment:
1 W.P.No.8939/2012 Anwar Anjum Khan versus State of M.P.& ORS.19.07.2013 Shri Mukhtar Ahmed learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Rahul Rawat, learned Panel Lawyer, for the respondent/State.
Heard on the question of admission.
The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by the fact that his claim for compassionate appointment on the death of the petitioner's father on 1.9.2011, who died while working as Sub Engineer in the Rani Awanti Bai Sagar, Left Canal Division No.2, Bargi Hills, Jabalpur, has been rejected by the respondent authorities on the ground that a succession case has been filed by the married sister of the petitioner.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in accordance with the policy of the State for compassionate appointment, a married daughter is disqualified for compassionate appointment and, therefore, there is no rival claim of the married sister as far as the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment is concerned and, therefore, there is no relevance of the order passed in the succession proceedings in the present case for compassionate appointment.
It is submitted that in such circumstances the rejection of the petitioner's application on this ground is misconceived.
2 W.P.No.8939/2012 Anwar Anjum Khan versus State of M.P.& ORS.The learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the respondent/State submits that the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment shall be processed and considered in accordance with the policy inspite of and without being hindered by the pendency of the succession proceedings, as expeditiously as possible.
In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the effect that in case the petitioner furnishes a copy of the order passed today alongwith a copy of the petition before the respondent authorities within fifteen days from today, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment in accordance with the policy expeditiously as far as possible within a period of three months thereafter.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and therefore the authorities would be at liberty to examine the matter keeping all facts and facets into consideration and thereafter either accept or reject the claim of the petitioner by passing a reasoned order.
With the aforesaid direction, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.
C.C as per rules.
( R.S.JHA ) JUDGE mms/-