ORDER :

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for compassionate appointment or lumpsum compensation in lieu of compassionate appointment as per Government Resolution dated 05.07.2011.

2.1 It is the case of the petitioner that father of the petitioner was working as Assistant Teacher with the Respondent No.4 – School since 02.09.1985. He expired on 18.07.2002 while on service. In view of death of the father of the petitioner on 18.07.2002, the petitioner made an application for compassionate appointment on 03.10.2002 within prescribed time limit of six months. However, at the time of death of father of the petitioner, the petitioner was minor and, therefore, he was not entitled to get compassionate appointment and hence his case could not be considered.

2.2 It is stated in the petition that in the year 2006, the petitioner attained the age of majority and thereafter once again the petitioner preferred an application for compassionate appointment vide application dated 21.01.2006 which was forwarded by respondent school to the Respondent No.3. However, vide order dated 30.09.2008, the Respondent No.2 rejected the aforesaid application made by the petitioner for compassionate appointment on the ground that the petitioner was not possessing CCC certificate as per Government Resolution dated 19.11.2004.

2.3 It is the case of the petitioner that in the year 2006 the petitioner was holding CCC certificate, however, despite that the case of the petitioner was not considered for compassionate appointment.

2.4 Thereafter the petitioner made several requests and representations orally to grant him compassionate appointment but the same were not considered positively by the respondent authorities.

2.5 Pursuant to the Government policy to give some lumpsum compensation in lieu of compassionate appointment vide Resolution dated 05.07.2011, the petitioner once again approached the respondent school with representation dated 08.08.2013 to consider the case of the petitioner in light of the aforesaid Government Resolution dated 05.07.2011. However, petitioner did not receive any positive response in respect of the same. After further communication in the year 2016, as the petitioner was not granted benefit of even lumpsum compensation as per Government policy dated 05.07.2011, the petitioner has preferred this petition.

3.1 Learned advocate Ms. Hingorani vehemently submitted that the petitioner was minor at the time when father of the petitioner died and attained the majority in the year 2006. On attaining the majority, he applied for compassionate appointment but his application was rejected on the ground that he did not possess the qualification of CCC certificate. She submitted that in fact the petitioner obtained the CCC certificate in October-November, 2006 on successful completion of the course and, therefore, the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was rejected on wrong ground. Actually, grounds put forward by the authority while rejecting the application for compassionate appointment of the petitioner in the year 2006 was not on the basis of any reason which may justify the rejection for the reason that the petitioner had already obtained CCC certificate in October-November, 2006 and, therefore, the authority committed grave error at the relevant point of time by not extending the benefit of compassionate appointment in favour of the petitioner.

3.2 She further submitted that though the petitioner was eligible and entitled for compassionate appointment in the year 2006 itself by ignoring the fact that the petitioner had obtained CCC certificate, authority rejected his application for compassionate appointment and thereafter even benefit of lumpsum compensation in lieu of compassionate appointment as per policy dated 05.07.2011 also has not been extended by the Government and, therefore, the action of the Government is contrary to the settled provisions of law and is contrary to the policy framed by the G