1. This is second visit of the petitioner to this Court for the same grievance. Draped in brevity, the relevant facts are that petitioner’s mother Janki Chourasia, an Assistant Teacher died in harness on 26.1.2013. The petitioner, the only daughter, preferred an application for grant of compassionate appointment which was rejected on 23.1.2014 Annexure P-4. Aggrieved, petitioner filed W.P. No.13325/2014 which was disposed of as per settlement arrived at in Lok Adalat on 13.4.2014. As per the settlement, the respondents were required to take a fresh decision on the claim of compassionate appointment as per the applicable policy. In turn, by order dated 23.1.2014, the outcome was communicated. Although a new policy dated 29.9.2014 is now invogue which contains a clause which enables the employer to consider the claim of married daughter, the said claim qua petitioner cannot be considered in the teeth of clause 12.2 of this policy dated 29.9.2014.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although clause 12.2 of this policy provides that previously preferred and rejected/disposed of claims shall not be considered, such impediment is bad in law and hits Article 14, 15, 16,