IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA LPA No. 20 of 2008 Date of decision : 15.5.2008 Union of India and others …Appellants Versus Charan Singh …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Judge. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K.Ahuja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Appellants: Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General of India. For the Respondent: Mr. Rahul Mahajan, Advocate. Per Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) This appeal is directed against the judgement of the learned Single Judge dated 26th October, 2007 passed in CWP No. 710 of 2007, whereby he had directed that the petitioner be re-instated and paid his salary and other consequential benefits. The undisputed facts are that the brother of the petitioner was serving in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF). This brother was killed in an encounter with militants on 7.6.1997. Thereafter, the writ petitioner (respondent here-in) applied for grant of compassionate appointment. He was granted appointment on compassionate grounds as Water Carrier on 17th February, 2004. He started discharging his duties as Water Carrier w.e.f. March, 2004. The services of the writ petitioner were 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. 2 terminated on 14th January, 2006. The only ground for terminating his services was that the petitioner had not disclosed at the time of seeking employment that his father is a Government employee. The learned Single Judge has quoted paragraph ‘V’ of the application by which the petitioner had applied for compassionate employment. In this paragraph the petitioner was required to give details of all his family members and to show whether they are Government employees or not. Against item No. 3, the petitioner has mentioned his father’s name and had clearly stated that his father is a Government employee. The petitioner had, therefore, not withheld any facts from the appointing authority. The appointing authority obviously offered compassionate appointment to the petitioner even though his father was a Government employee. After three years this appointment could not have been terminated on the ground that the petitioner had withheld facts. We, therefore, find no error in the judgement of the learned Single Judge. The letters patent appeal is dismissed. No costs. ( Deepak Gupta ) Judge. 15th May, 2009. ( V.K.Ahuja ) ™ Judge.