Decided on July 06,2018

Sheikh Rafique Appellant
State of M.P. and Others Respondents


NANDITA DUBEY J. - (1.) - This petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 30.05.2017, passed by Collector, whereby the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment has been rejected.
(2.) The facts of the case lies in a narrow compass. The petitioner being the brother of deceased Sheikh Saeed, who lost his life in October, 2008, in the communal riots of Burhanpur, applied for compassionate appointment on the basis of government policy in vogue, which allegedly remained undecided. He thereafter, filed a writ petition No. 20125/2011, which came to be disposed of on 11.02.2017 in the National Law Adalat with a direction to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within a period of four months. However, the claim of the petitioner was dismissed vide the impugned order.
(3.) It is urged by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the communal riots of 2008, 9 persons (7 Muslims and 2 Hindus) have lost their lives. It is stated that the respondents have malafidely discriminated and singled out the petitioner because he belongs to a particular community. His claim has been rejected contrary to the government circular dated 11.01.1993, 22.11.2002 and the policy dated 18.08.2008, which provides for grant of compassionate appointment to the dependents of riot victims. It is stated that his claim was rejected invoking clause 2.1 of the 2008 policy, whereas on the same grounds, compassionate appointment was granted to the widows of two persons belonging to Hindu community, namely, Alka Bhavsar and Kalpana Shukla. It is further contended that in any case, monetary grant in lieu of compassionate appointment according to the policy ought to have been given to the petitioner.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.