{1} wp1136-26.doc drp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.1136 OF 2026 Jayant Raju Ambhore PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and Others RESPONDENTS ....... Mr. K. J. Suryawanshi, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for Respondent - State ....… [CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, & ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. J.] DATE : 22 nd JUNE, 2026 ORDER : 1. By this Petition, the Petitioner, challenges order dated 28th February, 2023 passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, in Original Application No. 24 of 2022 and further seeks direction to Respondents No.1 and 2 to delete name of Respondent No.3 from the waiting list prepared for appointment on compassionate ground and to include his name. 2. None for Respondent No.3, though served. 3. Heard learned Advocate for the Petitioner and learned AGP for the State. 4. It is the case of the Petitioner that, his father was serving as 2026:BHC-AUG:24648-DB {2} wp1136-26.doc Police Constable, who expired while in service on 14th August, 2007. At the time of death of his father, the Petitioner was minor. He attained majority in the year 2014 and immediately he applied for appointment on compassionate ground. His request is turned down by Respondents No.1 and 2, on the ground that application of his step mother – Respondent No.3, for appointment on compassionate ground is already pending. 5. Being aggrieved, the Petitioner approached the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, by filing Original Application No. 24 of 2022. The same is dismissed by the Tribunal. Hence, the present Writ Petition. 6. In the impugned order, the Tribunal has observed that, “The second wife also preferred an application in the year 2007 itself and the same is pending. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that entire pension is being received by the second wife of the deceased Government servant. In the circumstances, according to learned counsel, the present applicant, who is son from first wife of the deceased Government servant, is entitled for appointment on compassionate ground”. The Tribunal, therefore, held that, the Petitioner has failed to bring to its notice any provision showing that when one application seeking appointment on compassionate ground presented by one legal heir of the deceased is pending for consideration, any other legal heir of the deceased can also file the application and that can be considered by the Government. {3} wp1136-26.doc 7. In the facts of the present case, we are of the opinion that, Respondent No.2 should decide the eligibility of the Petitioner and Respondent No.3, to claim appointment on compassionate ground. 8. Learned AGP submits that, the eligibility will be decided by Respondent No.2. 9. In view of the aforesaid peculiar facts, we quash and set aside the impugned order dated 28th February, 2023 passed by Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No.22 of 2024. 10. Respondent No.2 is directed to decide the eligibility of the Petitioner and Respondent No.3, in accordance with the law, rules and government policy, on its own merits, after giving the opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner and Respondent No.3, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of first appearance of Petitioner and Respondent No.3. 11. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. [ ABASAHEB D. SHINDE ] [ NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI ] JUDGE JUDGE drp/wp1136-26.doc