BHURI DEVI MEENAANDORS v. STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENTORS
CW/19432/2015 · 2025-03-19
Sameer Jain
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 25048 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 25048 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:12808] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19432/2015
1. Bhuri Devi Meena W/o Sh. Goverdhan Lal Meena, Jaisinghpura Tehsil Rajgarh Distt. Alwar.
2. Hemant Kumar Meena S/o Sh. Goverdhan Lal Meena., Jaisinghpura Tehsil Rajgarh Distt. Alwar.
3. Hemanti Meena D/o Sh. Goverdhan Lal Meena, Jaisinghpura Tehsil Rajgarh Distt. Alwar.
4. Man Singh Meena S/o Sh. Goverdhan Lal Meena, Jaisinghpura Tehsil Rajgarh Distt. Alwar. ----Petitioners Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary Secondary Education Department Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director Secondary Education Rajasthan, Bikaner.
3. The District Education Officer Secondary, Dausa. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh Sharma For Respondent(s) : Ms. Namita Parihar, Dy. G. C.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Judgment 19/03/2025
1. The instant petition is filed with the following prayers:-
“i) That the impugned order dated 07.08.2015 and 03.09.2015 may be declared illegal and same may be quashed and set aside. ii) It is further prayed that respondents may kindly be
directed to issue compassionate appointment to the petitioner No. 2 iii) It is further prayed that the respondent may kindly be directed to issue regular pension to the petitioner arising out of declaration of Goverdhan Lal Meena as dead with effect from 08.11.2005 with all consequen- tial benefits viz. gratuity, leave encashment etc. with interest of 18 percent per annum for the delayed pay- ment. iv) any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the may also be passed in favour of the petitioners. Cost of writ petition may also be al- lowed in favour of the petitioner.”
2. Heard and considered.
[2025:RJ-JP:12808] (2 of 2) [CW-19432/2015]
3. Upon a perusal of the record, it is noted that the civil death of the family member, against whom compassionate appointment is sought, occurred in the year 2012. Thereafter, the instant petition was filed seeking compassionate appointment in the Year 2015. The petition has come up on board for hearing for the first time today i.e. in the Year 2025. Ever since the filing of the instant petition, no active steps were taken by the petitioner for the early listing of the matter.
4. As on date, over 13 years have lapsed since the civil death of the earning family member, against whom compassionate employment is sought. If compassionate appointment is made now, the same shall be against the object and purpose for which the appointment on compassionate grounds is provided. The whole object of granting compassionate employment is to enable the family to tide over the sudden crisis caused by the instant death of the earning family member. The object is not to give such family a post, much less a post held by the deceased family member. In this regard, reliance can be placed upon the dictum of the Hon’ble Apex Court as enunciated in Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd. and Ors. vs. Anusree K.B. reported in AIR 2022 SC 4766.
5. As a result, in light of the foregoing observations, the instant petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, stand
disposed of.
(SAMEER JAIN),J Pooja /118