Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Sunita Gaikwad (widow) and Ashish Gaikwad (son), sought compassionate appointment after the death of Dinesh Gaikwad, an employee of Zilla Parishad, Nanded, who died in harness on 05.08.2017. The deceased had three children: the eldest born on 21.02.1994, a second child, and a third child born on 18.09.2003. The State of Maharashtra's Government Resolution dated 28.03.2001, Clause E, stated that families with a third child born after 31.12.2001 would not be eligible for compassionate appointment. The petitioners argued that the third child was born before 31.12.2001, but the respondents contended that the cut-off date applied to the birth of the third child. The court examined two Division Bench judgments: one cited by the petitioners (Kashabai Sheshrao Wagh v. Zilla Parishad, Nashik) and another by the respondents. The court held that Clause E is prospective and does not disqualify families where the third child was born before 31.12.2001. Since the third child was born on 18.09.2003, which is after 31.12.2001, the court found that the petitioners were not eligible under the strict reading of the clause. However, the court noted that the judgment in Kashabai's case had interpreted the clause differently, and the matter required further consideration. The court reserved judgment and ultimately allowed the petition, directing the respondents to consider the petitioners' application for compassionate appointment in light of the interpretation that the clause applies only to children born after 31.12.2001.
Headnote
A) Compassionate Appointment - Eligibility - Third Child Born After Cut-off Date - Government Resolution dated 28.03.2001, Clause E - The court considered whether the clause disqualifying families with a third child born after 31.12.2001 applies to children born before that date. Held that the clause is prospective and does not apply to children born before 31.12.2001, thus the petitioners were eligible. (Paras 1-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the family of a deceased employee with a third child born after 31.12.2001 is eligible for compassionate appointment under the Government Resolution dated 28.03.2001.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, holding that Clause E of the Government Resolution dated 28.03.2001 is prospective and does not apply to children born before 31.12.2001. Since the third child was born on 18.09.2003, which is after 31.12.2001, the court directed the respondents to consider the petitioners' application for compassionate appointment in accordance with law, taking into account the interpretation that the clause applies only to children born after 31.12.2001.
Law Points
- Compassionate appointment
- Government Resolution
- third child
- cut-off date
- eligibility
- interpretation of clause
- prospective application
