SUNIL KUMAR GARG
Rajesh Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
(2). The facts of the case as put forward by the petitioner are as under:
i) That the petitioners father was appointed with the respondents and he died while in service. Thereafter the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment after death of his father.
Note: It is strange that date of death of the deceased has not been mentioned in the writ petition.
ii) Further case of the petitioner is that through order dtd. 10.8.88 (Annex. 1) passed by the respondent No. 3 (Superintendent of Police, Sri Ganganagar), the petitioner was appointed on the post of Constable on compassionate ground.
iii) Further case of the petitioner is that in pursuance of order dtd. 10.8.88 (Annex.1) pas
1. Sushma Gosain and Ors. vs. Union of India (AIR 1989 SC 1976)–Followed.
2. Smt. Phoolwati vs. Union of India (AIR 1991 SC 469)
5. State of Bihar vs. Samsuz Zoha (AIR 1996 SC 1961)
3. Umesh Kumar Nagpal vs. State of Haryana (1994 (4) SCC 138)
4. Jagdish Prasad vs. State of Bihar (1996 (1) SCC 301)
6. Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation vs. Dinesh Kumar (1996 (4) SCC 560)
10. Director of Education vs. Pushpendra Kumar (1998 (5) SCC 192)
11. Cochin Cock Labour Board vs. Leemamma Samuel (1998 (9) SCC 87)
12. UPRTC vs. Pukhraj Singh (1999 (1) SCC 190)
13. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation vs. P. Pochaiah (1999 (1) SCC 191)
9. Haryana State Electricity Board vs. Hakim Singh (1997 (8) JT 332)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.