Civil Writ Petition No. 6708 of 1993 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No. 6708 of 1993 Date of decision:- 04.07.2011 Raghubir Singh ....Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present:- Ms. Heena Talwar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. P.C. Goel, Addl. A.G. Punjab. ***** A.N. JINDAL, J (ORAL) The petitioner has invoked the provisions of Article 226 of Constitution of India for quashing the order Annexure P-8, whereby he was refused to be appointed as Forester at the time when he was offered appointment on compassionate grounds. Petitioner has further sought issuance of direction to the respondents to consider and appoint the petitioner on the post of Forester. The petitioner was appointed to the post of Forest Guard by the respondents, which was existing at the relevant time when his application for appointment on compassionate grounds was considered. It has been specifically stated that no post of Forester was available at that time. Civil Writ Petition No. 6708 of 1993 2 At the same time, the petitioner could not seek priority over any post, but he could raise a claim over the post commensurating his status. He was a matriculate and was eligible for the post of Forest Guard, which was existing at that time and he was given that benefit. The petitioner has placed reliance on a judgment passed in Sukhwinder Singh Vs. The State of Punjab and others, CWP No. 262 of1993, decided on 08.11.1993 (Annexure A-1), wherein it was observed as under:- “.....When on compassionate grounds one member of the family of th deceased is to be adjusted in the government job, such a post as commensurate with his educational qualifications, is to be offered. The petitioner is a B.A.M.S. and cannot be appointed as a Dispenser. No rule has been pointed out that a post below in rank commensurate with the educational qualifications possessed is to be offered.” The facts of the aforesaid case are quite distinctive. In this case, the petitioner was merely a matriculate and was eligible to the post of a Forest Guard. Thus, as per his eligibility, he could well be awarded the post of Forest Guard, which he was given, particularly when at that time no vacancy for the post of Forester was available. Furthermore, it appears that he must have been now promoted. No grounds to interfere. Dismissed. (A.N.JINDAL) 04th of July, 2011 JUDGE ajp