AMAAN KHAN v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Court: High Court of Uttarakhand
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ PUROHIT
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Uttarakhand judgment dated 2024-03-01. AMAAN KHAN v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 305 of 2024 Amaan Khan …..... Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand and Others …. …. Respondents Presence:- Mr. Mahendra Singh Rawat, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, learned Additional C. S. C. for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral) By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the indulgence of this Court for a direction to the respondent No. 4 to consider his claim for compassionate appointment in place of his deceased mother, who was working with the respondent department as Principal in Government Primary School, Sherpur, Roorkee, District Haridwar. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the mother of the petitioner was expired on 21. 08. 2012 and his father has already pre-deceased the mother in the year 2005. The petitioner has made an application on 17. 11.
2023 seeking compassionate appointment in place of his mother, who died while still in service. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the said application is still pending consideration before the respondent No. 4. 4. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that justice would be met, if a direction be issued to respondent No. 4 to consider the application of the petitioner expeditiously within a stipulated time fixed by this Court. 5. There is no opposition from the side of the State. 6. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of finally, with a direction to respondent No. 4-District Education Officer, Primary Education, Haridwar, to decide petitioner’s application dated 17. 11. 2023 (Annexure No.
2) for compassionate appointment within a period of three months’ from today, by reasoned and speaking order, particularly, considering the fact that the petitioner was minor at the time of death of his mother and he has also lost his father in 2005. 7. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of accordingly. (Pankaj Purohit, J. ) 01. 03. 2024 PN
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.