1 2-MCA No.309.2025FO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 309 OF 2025 (Review) IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5781 OF 2024 (D) Suresh S/o Chandrakant Raut ..VS.. Divisional Controller, MSRTC, Akola Division, Kaulkhed, Akola -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. S. T. Harkare, Advocate for the applicant/petitioner. Mr. P. S. Gawai, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM : SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J. DATED : 06 th FEBRUARY, 2026 1. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant/petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondent. 2. The petitioner seeking review of the Judgment and order passed by this Court on 06th March, 2025 in Writ Petition No.5781/2024. In the said petition, the petitioner challenged the order dated 30/08/2024, passed by the learned Member, Industrial Court, Akola by which, his Complaint (ULP) No.18/2014 was dismissed, it was filed against the Divisional Controller, MSRTC, Akola, who has rejected his application for appointment on compassionate ground. The said Complaint (ULP) No.18/2014 came to be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. 2026:BHC-NAG:2122 2 2-MCA No.309.2025FO 3. In the present review application, for the first time, the petitioner raised ground that Condition No.11 of Circular dated 16/02/1994 allow the petitioner till his age of 25 years to apply for compassionate appointment. The said condition is reproduced by the petitioner in the review petition itself, which reads as under : “¼11½ vuqdaik rRokoj use.kqdhlkBh bPNqd vl.kkjs voyachr tj vYio;hu vlrhy rj R;kaP;k o;kph 25 o”ksZ iq.kZ gksbZi;Zar mPp f’k{k.k izf’k{k.k rs brj vVh o vgZrk iw.kZ djhr vlY;kl vuqdaik rRokoj use.kqdhlkBh gDdnkj jkgrhy-” 4. On perusal of this condition, it appears that the applicant is required to acquire higher education and to satisfy the other conditions and eligibility, then only his application can be considered till he attains the age of 25 years. 5. It is admitted fact that, father of the petitioner died on 20/05/1983, date of birth of the petitioner is 14/09/1983 and he attained age of majority on 13/09/2002 therefore, he completes his age of 25 years on 13/09/2009. However, it appears that the petitioner filed the application for appointment on compassionate ground on 22/08/2011. He has not placed any document in relation to his education and even if, he has acquired higher education, he has crossed the age of 25 years. 3 2-MCA No.309.2025FO 6. As such, there is no error apparent on the face of record in the Judgment, even after considering the additional ground, which was not raised earlier, still the claim of the petitioner cannot be considered as per condition No. 11. Hence, the review application stands dismissed. (SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) Kirtak