Created by Fuzzy Cloud

High Court of Gujarat

MAGANBHAI POPATBHAI SAPARAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

Decided
Disposal
35-ANY OTHER MODE @ ADM.STAGE

Holding

The Court directed the petitioner to make a fresh representation and ordered the government department to decide it within four weeks, without examining the merits of the compensation claim.

Summary

The petitioners, parents of a deceased government employee, sought a writ directing the State of Gujarat to decide and implement a pending representation for a lump‑sum compensation of Rs. 4,00,000 under a government scheme for compassionate appointments. They alleged that their earlier applications filed in 2018 and 2020 remained undecided, violating their right to the statutory benefit. The Court examined whether it could issue procedural directions without adjudicating the substantive claim. It held that it could order the petitioner to file a fresh representation and direct the relevant government department to decide it within a specified time, without assessing eligibility. Accordingly, the Court directed the petitioner to make the representation to Respondent No.3, which must be forwarded to Respondent No.2 for a reasoned decision, and ordered payment within twelve weeks if eligibility is confirmed. The petition was then disposed of without any order on costs.

Issues considered

  • What procedural authority does the High Court have to direct a government department to decide a pending representation for lump‑sum compensation?
  • Whether a writ of mandamus or certiorari is appropriate when the substantive merits of the compensation claim have not been examined.

Subjects

  • lump‑sum compensation
  • compassionate appointment
  • government scheme
  • writ of mandamus
  • procedural direction
  • administrative law
  • pending representation

Judgment

    C/SCA/3218/2025                           ORDER DATED: 09/03/2026




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3218 of 2025

==========================================================
                 MAGANBHAI POPATBHAI SAPARA & ANR.
                              Versus
                     STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MA PAREKH(1088) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
MS KINJAL VYAS AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI

                          Date : 09/03/2026

                           ORAL ORDER


1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Parekh for the petitioner. By
way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the
following reliefs:


      (A) Your Lordships may be pleased to admit / allow the
      present petition, in the interest of justice;

      (B) Be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or a Writ of
      Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or
      Direction & direct the respondents, herein, to Decide &
      Implement Pending Proposals sent by the Respondents by
      way their inter-se Communications Regarding Payment of
      Lump-sum amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- to the petitioners,
      In View of, G.R. Dt. 20.7.2017 At Ann. A about lump-
      sum Compensation to the dependent family of Class-III,
      and Class-IV employees of FIXED SALARY, who die



                              Page 1 of 4
        C/SCA/3218/2025                           ORDER DATED: 09/03/2026




          during the Contractual Period, accordingly, within
          prescribed time limit, forthwith, in the interest of justice;

          (C) Pending, admission and final disposal of the present
          petition this Hon Court may be pleased to grant the
          prayer in terms of Paragraph 15 (B), forthwith, in the
          interest of justice;

          (D) Any other and further relief/s may kindly be granted
          in the interest of justice;


2.       It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner’s son,
Bharatbhai Maganbhai Sapara, was working on the post of
Vidhya Sahayak and died during the course of his service on
27.01.2016 in a motor vehicle accident. It is further the case
of the petitioner that he was not aware of the Government
scheme providing the benefit of lump-sum compensation to the
dependent family members. Therefore, the petitioner made his
first     representation   on   27.04.2018     seeking    compassionate
appointment and also prayed for monetary relief in the form of
lump-sum compensation on account of the death of his son.
However, the aforesaid application has remained undecided till
date. Therefore, according to learned advocate Mr. Dhruv
Parekh, the respondents may be directed to decide the
representation. It is further submitted that the petitioner
thereafter made another representation in the year 2020 and


                                 Page 2 of 4
     C/SCA/3218/2025                               ORDER DATED: 09/03/2026




that the petitioner is still ready and willing to make a fresh
representation to the respondents, which may be directed to be
decided by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law
and to communicate the decision to the petitioner.


3. In view of the above, the petitioner is directed to make a
representation         seeking   lump-sum       compensation        to       the
respondents, more particularly to respondent No.3, who shall
forward the same to respondent No.2. The Respondent No.2
shall decide the representation that may be made by the
petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt of such representation.


4. Once the representation is made to respondent No.3, the
same shall be forwarded to respondent No.2, who shall
consider and decide the same by taking into consideration the
applicable        Government      Resolution     regarding        lump-sum
compensation in cases relating to compassionate appointment,
and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law and
communicate the same to the petitioner.


5.    If the petitioner is found eligible and entitled to receive
the lump-sum compensation, the same shall be paid to the
petitioner within a period of twelve weeks from the date of


                                  Page 3 of 4
        C/SCA/3218/2025                                                                 ORDER DATED: 09/03/2026




such decision.


6.        With the above directions, the petition stands disposed
of. Notice is discharged. No order as to costs. It is clarified
that this Court has not examined the merits of the matter.




                                                                                            (NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
BHAVIN MEHTA




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE I, at High Court of Gujarat on 09/03/2026 17:58:46




                                                         Page 4 of 4


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.