CWP No.8482/2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.8482/2007 Date of Decision: 5.2.2008 Kamla Verma ............. Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others. ..............Respondents. CORAM:HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present:- Sh.Manohar Lall, Advocate for the petitioner. Sh.Harish Rathee, Sr.D.A.G.Haryana for the respondents. ***** JASBIR SINGH, J.(ORAL) By filing this writ petition, petitioner has laid challenge to order dated 14.2.2007 (Annexure P-14) vide which her prayer, to appoint her son in service on compassionate grounds, was rejected. It is apparent from the record that earlier also petitioner came to this Court seeking appointment for her son on that very ground. That writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 13.10.2006 directing the respondents to take note and decide pending representation of the petitioner keeping in view the ratio of the judgment in Jai Ram v. U.H.B.V.N.Ltd. And another, 2004(5) SLR 851. Thereafter, order Annexure P-14 was passed. After hearing counsel for the parties and going through the paper book, we are of the opinion that petitioner is not entitled to any relief at this stage. Record reveals that husband of the petitioner, who was working as Forest Guard died in harness on 29.9.1986. As per instructions existing at that time, service, on compassionate grounds was offered to the petitioner CWP No.8482/2007 2 vide order dated 5.1.1987. In response to that, she wrote a letter on 17.7.1987 stating therein that she be given appointment against Class-IV Post in Government Girls School Beri, District Rohtak, instead of Forest Department, as was offered to her. Her request was not accepted as in the Education Department no post was lying vacant. Again post of Peon was offered to her vide letter dated 22.11.1988 in the Forest Division Rohtak. She failed to join on the pretext that her children were sick and she be given one month's joining time. Even thereafter, she did not join her duties. The department showed compassion to her and again wrote a letter on 20.4.1993 offering her the post of Peon in the office of Divisional Forest Officer, Rohtak. She again failed to join. Rather she wrote an application dated 14.5.1993 stating that if she cannot be appointed in Education Department then her son, who was minor at that time, be given appointment on his attaining the age of majority. Her son attained majority in the year 2003. His case was rejected for appointment on the ground that as per instructions prevailing in the year 1986, appointment could have been offered to the dependents of the deceased government employees within three years only and the post could not have been reserved for the minor children. By taking note of the above mentioned facts, the prayer was rejected vide order Annexure P-14. We are satisfied that the order passed is perfectly justified. The idea behind providing ex-gratia appointment/ financial benefits is to bring out the dependents of the deceased government employees from immediate financial crisis. In the present case that object, in view of intervening period of 21 years seems to have been achieved. Twice the petitioner was offered compassionate appointment but she did not join and instead stated CWP No.8482/2007 3 that one post be kept reserved for her son till his attaining the age of majority. The government posts are not posts of inheritance and can not be reserved in the manner suggested by the petitioner. In view of the facts mentioned above, no case for interference is made out. Dismissed. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 5.2.2008 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge