Mr. Suraj Ganapati Pawar v. District Superintendent Of Land Records And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10516 OF 2023 Digitally signed by UDAY SHIVAJI JAGTAP Date:

2025.11.06 19:02:47 +0530 Suraj Ganapati Pawar ... Petitioner UDAY SHIVAJI JAGTAP

Versus

District Superintendent of Land Records and Ors.

... Respondents .............

Mr. Santosh M. Suryawanshi for the Petitioner. Mr. V.M. Mali, AGP for the Respondent - State. .............

Coram : M. S. Karnik & Ajit B. Kadethankar, JJ.

Date : November 06, 2025.

ORAL ORDER (Per Ajit B. Kadethankar) :

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned AGP for the respondent - State.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's father - Ganpati Ramchandra Pawar was serving under the establishment of respondent no.1 - District Superintendent of Land Records as Taluka Inspector Land Records at Shirol, Tal. Shirol, Dist. Kolhapur. He submits 1 of

that said Ganpati R. Pawar expired while on duty on 27th October, 2009 leaving behind his widow Smt. Meena Ganpati Pawar, daughters Mrs. Usha Sachin Pawar, Mrs. Asha Rajendra Ghadge, Ms. Uma Ganpati Pawar, Ms. Mahadevi Ganpati Pawar and son Suraj Ganpati Pawar i.e. the present petitioner. Learned counsel submits that pursuant to the death of Ganpati R. Pawar, application for seeking compassionate appointment was filed by the widow Smt. Meena Ganpati Pawar on 1st December 2009. It is further submitted that the said application was returned for the reason that the applicant failed to satisfy the authorities on certain queries. He further submitted that thereafter, the present petitioner filed his application seeking compassionate appointment, whereby consent of other legal representatives of the deceased Ganpati R.

Pawar was placed on record. Learned counsel submitted that accordingly an application was filed by the petitioner with the respondent authorities. It is submitted that the said application is still pending with the respondent authorities. That, no action has been taken pursuant to the said application. At present, the petitioner restricts his claim to the extent of directions to the respondent authorities to consider the pending application of the petitioner seeking compassionate appointment. 3.

Mr. Mali, learned AGP submits that record speaks that the 2 of

application is pending with the respondent authorities and if the directions are given, the application could be decided accordingly. 4.

In this view of the matter, we find that the petition can be disposed of by giving directions to the respondent authorities. We, therefore, direct the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to decide the application filed by the petitioner seeking compassionate appointment in place of deceased Ganpati R. Pawar, in view of the policy i.e. being exercised by the State Government, the Rules / Regulations if any.

5.

The respondent nos. 1 and 2 would decide such application on its own merits within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, and shall immediately communicate the petitioner of its result. The petitioner be given an opportunity to clear the deficiencies, if any.

6.

With these directions the Writ Petition stands disposed of. [Ajit B. Kadethankar, J. ] [ M. S. Karnik ] 3 of