IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 5^th February 2026 SONU .…...Appellant(s)

V/s STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS …....Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Present Mr. Robin Dutt, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Pankaj Middha, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

****

ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, J. (Oral)

1. The claim of the appellant for appointment on the compassionate grounds has been rejected by the respondents-authorities. In a challenge laid to such decision, the Writ Court has also been dismissed i.e. the Writ Petition, vide order dated 29.10.2025, by observing that the requisite benefit admissible to the family of the deceased-employee, had already been extended.

2. Undisputedly, the father of the appellant died in harness on

23.06.2017. The Policy/Rules applicable at that point of time were the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 2006’) in which only provision available was for grant of ‘compassionate financial assistance’ without there being any provision for grant of ‘compassionate appointment’. In terms of the Policy applicable at the time of death of the employee, the requisite amount of compassionate financial assistance has been provided to the mother of the appellant (wife of the deceased employee). The compassionate financial assistance, which is admissible, in terms of the applicable Policy, continues to be received by the family of the deceased employee. It is only after the appellant has attained the age of majority that a claim has been made for compassionate appointment under the Haryana Civil Services (Compassionate Financial Assistance or Appointment) Rules, 2019 (hereinafter referred to ‘the Rules of 2019’) which has been rejected by the respondents-Authorities vide order dated 24.10.2023.

3. The claim of the appellant is for compassionate appointment in terms of the Policy/Rules framed in the year 2019 vide notification dated 02.08.2019. Note 1 appended to Rule 3, restricts the benefit of the Policy in case of death prior to 02.08.2019 only where the benefit of compassionate financial assistance in terms of Rules of 2006 has not been extended. Note 1 appended to Rule 3 of the Rules of 2019 is relevant and is reproduced hereinafter:-

“Note 1.- The family of deceased Government employee who died before the date of notification of these rules but have not been sanctioned the compassionate financial assistance by the competent authority due to one reason or the other, they may exercise an option within a period of six months from the date of notification either to avail the benefit under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Departments of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006 or these rules. Option once exercised shall be final.”

4. In the facts of the case, it is admitted that the compassionate financial assistance has been extended to the family of the deceased employee who has died in harness. Once that be so, the provisions of the subsequent Policy of 2019 cannot be invoked to claim compassionate appointment. In such view of the matter, rejection of the claim of the appellant by the respondent-authorities as also its affirmance by the learned Single Bench, therefore, merits no interference. The present LPA stands dismissed, accordingly.

5. All pending applications in this case, if any, are disposed of accordingly.

[ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA]

JUDGE [ROHIT KAPOOR]

JUDGE February 5, 2026 Ess Kay Whether speaking / reasoned : Yes / No Whether Reportable : Yes / No