Vitthalrao Pittalwar Guruji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal (Late) v. State of Maharashtra and others
2001-08-02
R.M.LODHA, S.K.SHAH
body2001
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT - R.M. LODHA, J.:---Heard Shri Kukday, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the writ petition and the documents annexed thereto. 2. For the purposes of this order, we will refer to the person, who was in employment of the petitioner and died due to A.I.D.S. as Mr. 'X' and his widow, who applied for employment on compassionate ground as Mrs. 'Z'. 3. Mr. 'X' died on 24-12-1998, as he was suffering from A.I.D.S. After his death, his widow Mrs. 'Z' made an application for getting appointment on compassionate ground. In the opinion of the petitioner-society, since Mr. 'X' died of A.I.D.S. and Mrs. 'Z' would also be a patient of A.I.D.S., her application for employment on compassionate ground was rejected. It further appears that, according to the petitioner-society, Mrs. 'Z' tried to commit suicide and due to that, sustained burn injuries and started looking uncanny and, therefore, in place of Mr. 'X', another peon was appointed. Refusal to grant employment to Mrs. 'Z' by the petitioner-society on the ground that she might be suffering from A.I.D.S. was not accepted by the Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati, and by communication dated 17-4-2000 issued by respondent No. 3, i.e. Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati, and the consequential order dated 28-4-2000 issued by respondent No. 2, the petitioner-society was directed to give employment to Mrs. 'Z'. 4. It is apparent that Mrs. 'Z' was refused employment on compassionate ground, as, in the opinion of the present petitioner, her husband, Mr. 'X', died of A.I.D.S. and his widow, Mrs. 'Z' would also be a patient of A.I.D.S. This approach of the present petitioner in refusing to grant employment to the widow of Mr. 'X' was wholly illegal and, therefore, an injustice caused to Mrs. 'Z' has rightly been redressed by respondent No. 3 by issuing the impugned communication dated 17-4-2000 and the consequential order dated 28-4-2000 by respondent No. 2. 5. Insofar as the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner to the effect that after the death of Mr. 'X', his widow, Mrs. 'Z', attempted to commit suicide and burnt herself and due to that, she has started looking uncanny, is concerned, we are afraid that there is no sufficient material before us about the burn injuries sustained by Mrs.
'X', his widow, Mrs. 'Z', attempted to commit suicide and burnt herself and due to that, she has started looking uncanny, is concerned, we are afraid that there is no sufficient material before us about the burn injuries sustained by Mrs. 'Z' and besides that, merely because she is looking uncanny, she cannot be denied employment under law when she is entitled to the employment on compassionate ground as her husband died while in service. 6. No exception can be taken to the communication passed by respondent No. 3 on 17-4-2000 and the consequential order passed by the respondent No. 2 on 28-4-2000. 7. Writ petition has, accordingly, no merit and is dismissed. Upon dismissal of writ petition, ad interim order passed by this Court on 26-5-2000 stands discharged. Writ petition dismissed. -----