Government Resolution imposing ban on fresh recruitment will not apply to the appointments made on compassionate basis: Bombay High Court
Government Resolution imposing ban on fresh recruitment will not apply to the appointments made on compassionate basis, simply because, the very object in all such appointments is to enable the State Government to carry forward its earlier policy despite the overall ban on recruitment and appointment, held, a division bench of Justice RD Dhanuka and Justice RI Chaglwa while adjudicating the matter in Sunil Gundu Desai v. The State of Maharashtra and Others; [WRIT PETITION NO.4673 OF 2019].
The father of the petitioner who was working in the said school died on 30th July 2014. The petitioner had approached the respondent nos.3 & 4 on 26th August 2014 requesting that he should be appointed on the post of peon on compassionate basis. The said school appointed the petitioner on the post of a peon w.e.f. 1st October 2014 vide order dated 25th September 2014. The respondent nos.3 & 4 submitted a proposal for approval to the respondent no.2 Education Officer (Secondary). However, no decision has been taken for approval. The management and the said school again submitted the proposal for approval to the appointment of the petitioner. The respondent no.2 returned the said proposal for approval of the petitioner’s appointment by placing reliance on the Government Resolution dated 12th February 2015. Being aggrieved by the impugned order, the present petition has been filed.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner invited our attention to the impugned order and submitted that the sole basis for not approving the appointment of the petitioner on the post of peon in the said school is on the basis of Government Resolution dated 12th February 2015 by which such appointments were banned. He submits that the said Government Resolution dated 12th February 2015 applies with prospective effect.
The Court upon considering the aforesaid facts stated that; “We have considered the facts of the present case as well as the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Suraj Uttam Kamble (supra) which has relied upon the Bench’s earlier decision in Writ Petition No.7507 of 2016 dated 11th December 2018. It is made clear from the said decision that appointment on compassionate basis were kept outside of the purview of the general ban imposed on recruitment by Government Resolution dated 2nd May 2012. This would apply also to the subsequent Government Resolution dated 12th February 2015 which is the sole basis of the impugned order in the present case. Thus, the said Government Resolution imposing ban on fresh recruitment will not apply to the appointments made on compassionate basis. The very object in all such appointments is to enable the State Government to carry forward its earlier policy despite the overall ban on recruitment and appointment. We are of the view that this petition is covered by the judgment in the case of Suraj Uttam Kamble (supra). Although the learned AGP appearing for the respondent nos.1 & 2 tried to defend the impugned order, there is no merit in the submission made by the learned AGP.”