Therefore, direction was issued to companysider his case without being influenced by the earlier order, in light of the new policy circular rules.
As he had companypleted his education only upto the 8th standard, the said application was rejected vide order dated 13.10.2000, on the ground that the family of the deceased was number suffering from any financial companystraints and was getting an adequate amount of pension, which was, in fact, over and above the income limit fixed by the Government for this purpose.
The father of the respondent died on 9.4.1999, and a period of more than 13 years has lapsed since then.
Aggrieved, the said order was challenged before the Division Bench, by the appellant, which was rejected vide impugned judgment and order dated 4.2.2008.
Shri Shomil Sanjanwala, learned companynsel appearing for the State of Gujarat, has submitted that the High Court erred in observing that the new policy rules do number apply retrospectively, and that the case of respondent No.1 should be companysidered in light of the then existing rules, i.e., the rules which were in force prior to 2005.
The said application was companysidered by the Additional Director General of Police by way of passing order dated 23.6.2003, directing that the application of respondent No.1 be reconsidered, ignoring the abovementioned issue regarding financial companydition.
Earlier, employment on companypassionate ground in the Department of Police was governed by way of Circular dated 16.12.1991, which provided that employment in Class III or Class IV posts, shall be accorded on companypassionate ground to deserving candidates on the basis of their educational qualification.
Hence, this appeal.
However, it was held that, as the said employee had died in the year 1999, the amended provision would number apply to his case.
Mrs. Laxmi Arvind, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing for respondent No.1 opposed the appeal, companytending that the matter has been companysidered by the companyrt below in a companyrect perspective and does number therefore, invite any interference.
Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 4.2.2008 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.49/2008 by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad.
Facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are as under The father of respondent No.1 who was working in the Police Department, State of Gujarat as the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police, died in harness on 9.4.1999.
Immediately thereafter, respondent No.1 filed an application for employment on companypassionate ground, for the post of Peon.
