S.J.Mukhopadhaya, J.

1. The petitioner who was appointed on compassionate ground was terminated vide order dated 14th December 96. She moved before this Court against the order of termination in C.W.J.C. No. 439/97, wherein this Court, vide order dated 1st May,97 gave liberty to the petitioner to file representation before the competent authority along with relevant materials to establish that she was also entitled for appointment.

The petitioner while moved before the authorities and filed representation on 1st July 97 though it was recommended by the higher authorities, the same has been rejected, vide order dated 4th May99 (Annexure-11), which has been challenged by filing amendment petition (I.A.No. 11387/99).

2. The sole question to be determined in this case is whether a dependent of a person working in a Workcharged Establishment is entitled for compassionate appointment on his death or not.

3. In the present case, the husband of the petitioner, Late Shankar Chaudhary was engaged on daily wage in the Workcharged Establishment of State in its Public Health Engineering Deptt. Sub-sequently, he was appointed in the scale of Rs. 350-425/- to the post of Walkup Khalasi, v