Aniket Vilas Suryawanshi v. State Of Maharashtra And Others
937wp9170.21
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 937 WRIT PETITION NO.9170 OF 2021 ANIKET VILAS SURYAWANSHI
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr.Patil Bipinchandra K. AGP for Respondent No. 1-State : Mrs. V.N.Patil (Jadhav) Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 : Mr. V.C. Patil h/f Mr. Bondar Uttam Bajirao ...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL & SANDEEP V. MARNE, JJ.
DATE : 25.08.2022.
PER COURT : (PER - SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) 1.
The petitioner seeks compassionate appointment. His application is rejected by the communication dated 30.10.2012, on the ground that the petitioner's father was working on the post of 'Electrician- Vijtantri', which is paid through the self generated funds/ income of the Zilla Parishad.
2.
This issue is no more res-integra and is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 20.08.2022 passed by this Court in Amol S/o Sahebrao Suryawanshi Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors - Writ Petition No. 9119 of 2021.
3.
The only objection of Mr. V.C. Patil, the learned counsel
937wp9170.21 appearing for the Zilla Parishad is that the case was rejected on 30.10,2012 and the petition is thus barred by delay and latches. Mr. Patil Bipinchandra, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner urges before us that the petitioner was orally assured that as and when the issue would be decided in similar petitions, his case would be re-considered. We do not express any opinion on this and the issue is left open.
4.
We set aside the communication dated 30.10.2012. The Zilla Parishad is directed to re-consider the case of the petitioner on its own merits and the same shall not be rejected only on the ground that the petitioner's father was paid through the self generated funds/income of the Zilla Parishad.
5.
Appropriate decision be taken within a period of three months from today.
6.
The petition is disposed of. No costs.
( SANDEEP V. MARNE ) ( MANGESH S. PATIL ) JUDGE JUDGE mahajansb/