IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 7355/2008 Decided on:2.12.2010 _____________________________________________ Banti Devi. …Petitioner. Versus Commissioner-cum-Secretary (Education) and others. …Respondents. _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1no For the petitioner : Nemo. For the Respondents: Mr. P.M. Negi, Dy. Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Asstt. A.G. ____________________________________________________ Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Petitioner’s father was working as Part Time Water Carrier in Government Primary School, Grameg, District Kullu. He died on 10.9.1996. Petitioner earlier filed original application, bearing OA (M) No. 274/99 seeking compassionate appointment after the death of her father. The same was directed to be treated as representation by the learned erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?no 2 Tribunal on 7.12.2000 to the Commissioner-cum-Secretary (Education). He rejected the same on 12.7.2001. The underlined principle for offering compassionate appointment to the member of the deceased’s family is to enable the family to tide over economic crises immediately after the death of bread earner. In this case, the death has occurred in the year 1996. There are no indigent circumstances now existing after a lapse of more than 13 years. The order passed by the Commissioner-cum-Secretary (Education) dated 12.7.2001 is speaking and detailed one. According to the Scheme framed by the respondent-State for offering appointment on compassionate basis, after the death of bread earner, cases of the Part Time Water Carrier are not covered. In the Scheme, cases of only those daily wagers are covered, who had been working in the same capacity for five years. 2. Since the case of the petitioner has become stale and is not covered under the Scheme, there is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge 2.12.2010 *awasthi*