CW 8021/06 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.8021/2006 Sarita Kanwar Versus State & (2) Ors. Date of Order ::: 11/09/08 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Ramavtar Sharma for Mr. SR Surana, for petitioner Mr. JK Agrawal, Addl.Govt. Counsel for respondents. Petitioner being widow of Jitendra who died on 30/03/06 while in service holding post of Sais in Department of Animal Husbandry , as alleged, is seeking compassionate appointment under Rajasthan Compassionate Appointment of Dependants of Deceased Government Servant Rules, 1996 (“Rules, 1996”) because her application was rejected by respondents vide order dt. 31/08/06 (Ann.3) on the premise that deceased Government servant was appointed on contract basis and there is not provision under Rules, 1996 to consider one of dependents of such deceased Government servant for compassionate appointment. Husband of petitioner after facing process of selection was appointed as Sais at the first instance vide order dt.21/02/1997 in pursuance whereof, was allowed to continue till he met with an accident and died on 30/03/06 while in service. His widow claiming herself as one of dependents of deceased Government servant CW 8021/06 //2// submitted application seeking compassionate appointment under Scheme of Rules, 1996, but was rejected vide order dt.31/08/06 (Ann.3). Counsel for petitioner submits that deceased Government servant was initially appointed as Sais for a period of six months on the recommendations of recruitment committee and was allowed to continue till his death. Counsel further submits that under Scheme of Rules, 1996, appointment can be made either on regular or urgent temporary or ad hoc basis; and giving nomenclature of appointment on contract basis and are allowed to continue for a sufficient long time is nonelse than urgent temporary appointment and persons while working on urgent temporary basis are covered U/r 2(b) of Rules, 1996 and in such circumstances, rejecting claim of petitioner for consideration of compassionate appointment vide order impugned is not sustainable. Respondents filed reply to writ petition and only objection raised therein is that deceased being appointed on contract basis, his widow is not entitled to seek compassionate appointment under Scheme of Rules, 1996. A bare perusal of order dt.21/02/97 (Ann.1) in pursuance whereof deceased employee was appointed as Sais, clearly shows that he was CW 8021/06 //3// called for interview and on recommendations made by recruitment committee, he was appointed on monthly consolidated sum of Rs.1800/- initially for six months and such appointment in fact was on an urgent temporary basis, and is covered U/r 2(b) of Rules, 1996; as such very premise on which respondents rejected claim of petitioner treating deceased as contractual employee, in the opinion of this Court is not legally sustainable and petitioner being widow and dependent upon deceased government servant is certainly entitled for consideration of compassionate appointment. Consequently, writ petition succeeds and is hereby allowed. Order dt.21/04/06 (Ann.3) rejecting claim of petitioner is quashed & set aside. Respondents are directed to consider claim of petitioner seeking compassionate appointment under Rules, 1996 and appropriate orders be passed within two months. No order as to costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p3/8021CW06cmsapt1109.doc