CWP-20023-2015

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-20023-2015

Date of Decision: 21.09.2015

Omwati and another

&Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others

... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARINDER SINGH SIDHU

Present: - Mr. Rajiv Dhawan, Advocate

for the petitioners.

--

HARINDER SINGH SIDHU, J.

This petition has been filed praying for directions to

the respondents to grant suitable compensation to the petitioners

in lieu of appointment on compassionate ground on account of

the death of Sh. Kushalpal-husband and father respectively of

petitioners No.1 and 2.

Sh. Kushal Pal was working as Assistant Lineman in

Barwala Division, District Ambala of the respondent-Corporation.

He expired on 26.10.1997. Immediately upon his death, the

mother of petitioner No.2, submitted an application seeking

appointment on compassionate ground for petitioner No.2, being

son of the deceased. As petitioner No.2 was a minor at that

time (about 17 years) it was requested that a post be kept

reserved for him. Once he attained the age of majority and also

acquired 10+2 qualification, the mother of petitioner No.2 again

ATUL KUMAR TRIPATHI

2016.01.22 16:46

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

chandigarh

CWP-20023-2015

-2-

submitted a representation requesting for compassionate

appointment for him. Respondent No.2 rejected the application

vide memo dated 11.01.1999 stating that there was no provision

under the ex gratia Scheme to keep a post reserved for a minor

son. Instead petitioner No. 1 was advised to seek employment

for herself. She again submitted representation stating that her

mental and physical condition did not permit her to take up a job

and that her son petitioner No.2 be adjusted as he had by then

become a major.

When

repeated

representations

seeking

compassionate appointment for petitioner No.2 did not receive

any positive response, the petitioners filed CWP No.16536 of

2005 praying for quashing the order dated 11.01.1999 and also

seeking directions to grant appointment to petitioner No.2 on

compassionate basis. It was pleaded therein that number of

similarly situated persons where the death of earning family

member had taken place after the death of earning member of

the petitioners, have been granted compassionate appointment,

which had been wrongly denied to the petitioners. This petition

was dismissed by a Division Bench on 30.11.2006 on the ground

of delay and laches. It was observed that the application of

petitioner No.1 seeking ex-gratia employment for her son

(petitioner No.2) was declined on 11.01.1999, which order had

been challenged in the year 2005 after a gap of about six years.

It was observed that the silence of the petitioners for a period of

ATUL KUMAR TRIPATHI

2016.01.22 16:46

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

chandigarh

CWP-20023-2015

-3-

about six years was indicative of the fact that theirs was not a

case where the family of the deceased required to be saved from

penury.

Now, the petitioners have filed the present petition

praying for the directions that they be given suitable

compensation in lieu of compassionate appointment.

Reliance has been placed on the `Haryana

Compassionate Assistance to Dependents of Deceased

Government Employees Rules, 2003'. It is contended that in

terms of these Rules an option has been given to the family of

the deceased employees to either opt for ex-gratia appointment

on compassionate ground or seek ex-gratia financial assistance

to the family of the deceased.

I have gone through the aforesaid Rules. As per

Rule 3(b) compassionate financial assistance of Rs. 2.5 lacs

under these Rules is to be given to the completely dependent

family members of the indigent family of the deceased. Indigent

family has been defined as <where the family of the deceased is

completely dependent on him/her and deserves immediate

assi