Bombay High CourtWP/3832/2016dispossed offdismiss for default

Smt. Seema Chandrashekhar Sahare v. Chief Executive Officer Mahagenco Corporate Office Mumbai And Others

2016-11-21Hon'Ble Smt. Justice V.A. Naik,Hon'Ble Mrs. Justice Swapna Joshi2 pages

1 wp3832.16.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.3832 OF 2016 [Smt. Seema Chandrashekhar Sahare .vs. Chief Executive Officer and others] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri A. Raghute, counsel for the petitioner.

Shri A.D. Mohgaonkar, counsel for the respondents. ..........

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATED : NOVEMBER 21, 2016.

By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction against the respondents to decide the application made by the petitioner, dated 5.4.2014 for appointment on compassionate ground.

The husband of the petitioner was working as a Technician in the Power Station at Chandrapur. The husband of the petitioner expired while in service on 19.6.2013 and the petitioner applied for appointment on compassionate ground. Though the petitioner made several representations to the respondents for appointing her, the respondents have not responded. The petitioner has, therefore, sought the aforesaid direction against the respondents.

Shri Mohgaonkar, the learned counsel for the respondents states that the application of the petitioner was not decided as the deceased employee has left behind his parents apart from the petitioner. It is stated that it is necessary for the petitioner to submit an undertaking to the respondents that she would take care of her in-laws if she is appointed on compassionate ground. Shri Raghute, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has already submitted such an undertaking and the same could find place at page 35 of the writ petition.

2 wp3832.16.odt On a reading of the undertaking at page 35, it appears that the petitioner has already submitted an undertaking to the respondents that she would take care of the persons dependent on her husband, after she is appointed on compassionate ground. The respondents should consider the said undertaking at page 35 to be an appropriate undertaking submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with the rules.

Since the husband of the petitioner has died recently and the petitioner has applied for compassionate appointment, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to decide the application of the petitioner and consider appointing the petitioner on compassionate ground within six weeks. Order accordingly. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE Gulande, PA