JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J.—Leave granted.

2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur dismissing the writ petition filed by the present appellants questioning correctness of the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench (in short CAT).

The controversy lies within a very narrow compass.

3. Respondent filed O.A.No.291 of 2003 before the CAT making a grievance that family pension and other terminal benefits were being denied to her by the present appellant on the ground that her deceased husband was not holding permanent status in service. CAT held that though her deceased husband Durga Lal was not holding a permanent status in service, yet respondent was entitled to the family pension and other benefits by treating him to have been regularized on the date of his death.

4. The High Court dismissed the writ petition holding that since the respondent has been given compassionate appointment, there was no merit in the writ petition.

5. In support of the appeal, learned counsel submitted that there was a scheme in operation and late Durga Lal was not holding permanent status and was only a casual