Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 27641 (RAJ)

SURESH CHAND v. STATE DEP OF UFYOG KHADI INDUORS

CW/9459/2011 · 2025-03-06

Sameer Jain

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:10798] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9459/2011 Suresh Chand S/o Late Shri Amar Chand, Gram Malipura, Post Sevar, Tehsil District Bharatpur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan Through Its Secretary, Department Of Udyog Khadi And Industries, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. The Managing Director, The Rajasthan Small Industries Corporation Ltd., Udyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur 3. The Manager Personnel The Rajasthan Small Industries Corporation Ltd., Udyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme Jaipur. 4. The Manager, The Rajasthan Small Industries Corporation Ltd. Jaipur Branch Riico Industrial Area., Bharatpur, Jaipur. 5. The Financial Advisor Panda, The Rajasthan Small Industries Corpn. Ltd., Udyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Schmem P.b. No. 180 Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None For Respondent(s) : Mr. R. P. Garg HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 06/03/2025 1. The instant petition is filed with the following prayers:- “i) By an appropriate writ, order or direction the re- spondents be directed to consider the case of the peti- tioner. ii) By an appropriate writ or direction the respondents be directed to give appointment to the petitioner on the post of Peon as per rules of Rajasthan Compas- sionate Appointment of Dependant of Deceased Gov- ernment Servant Rules, 1996 being a dependant of his father late Shri Amar Chand Saini against the vacant post or occuring in near future from the date of sub- mission of application form will all the consequential benefits and iii) By any other order which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper as per facts and circumstances and as per the judgments of Hon'ble High Court also be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Heard and considered. [2025:RJ-JP:10798] (2 of 2) [CW-9459/2011] 3. Upon a perusal of the record, it is noted that the death of the family member, against whom compassionate appointment is sought, occurred on 25.09.2006. Thereafter, the instant petition was filed seeking compassionate appointment in the Year 2011. 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 19 years have lapsed since the demise 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 /121