C.W.P. No.7412 of 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.7412 of 2007 DATE OF DECISION: MAY 21, 2009 Smt.Saroj Devi .....PETITIONER Versus The State of Haryana and others ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL --- Present: Mr.Johan Kumar, Advocate, for Mr.Vikram Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mrs. Sushma Chopra, Addl.A.G.,Haryana, for respondents No.1,2 and 4. Mr.C.B.Goel, Advocate and Mr.Nitin Jain, Advocate, for respondent No.3. .. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. Smt.Saroj Devi, widow of the deceased employee of the Moond Cooperative Society (respondent No.3 herein), has filed the instant petition for quashing the resolution dated 8.8.2003 passed by respondent No.3- Society, whereby the prayer of the petitioner for giving her compassionate appointment has been rejected on the ground that there is no vacant post of Sewadar and the Society is already running into financial losses since 31.3.2003. In the present case, the husband of the petitioner was working as Salesman in respondent No.3-Society. On 20.12.2000, he died while in service. After his death, the petitioner submitted an application for granting her the compassionate appointment. The said prayer has been declined by C.W.P. No.7412 of 2007 -2- the impugned resolution. After four years of the passing of the impugned resolution, the instant petition has been filed. In the petition, it has not been pleaded that respondent No.3-Society is having any policy of giving the compassionate appointment to the dependents of the deceased employees nor any such document has been annexed with the petition. During the course of arguments, counsel for the petitioner referred to the letter dated 21.7.1994 written by the Registrar, Co-operative Bank, Haryana, Chandigarh to all the Managing Directors, Central Cooperative Bank, Haryana, wherein it was decided that in the event of death of any employee of the Mini Bank, their dependent will be given compassionate appointment. In my opinion, the said letter is not applicable in case of respondent No.3-Society, which is not a Mini Bank. The prayer of the petitioner was rejected by the respondent-Society on the ground of non- availability of the post of Sewadar and that the Society has been running into financial losses. In the written statement filed by respondent No.3, these facts have been reiterated. In view of these facts and in view of the fact that there was no policy of the respondent-Society, the prayer of the petitioner for granting her the compassionate appointment was rightly rejected. Admittedly, respondent No.3-Society is not an instrumentality of the State, rather it is a cooperative Society. Thus, in my opinion, no ground for interference in the impugned resolution is made out. Dismissed. May 21, 2009 (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) vkg JUDGE