IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 13672 of 1992 Date of Decision: 10.5.2010. Naresh Kumar --Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- None for the petitioner. Mr. R.S. Kundu, Addl. A.G., Haryana. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Father of the petitioner late Sh. Ram Avtar Sharma was serving as Accountant in the office of Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Gurgaon and died in harness on 2.4.1988. The petitioner applied for compassionate appointment. The petitioner was appointed as Clerk vide order dated 6.2.1990. Petitioner accepted the offer of appointment and joined the post of Clerk. Petitioner's mother made a representation for appointment of the petitioner on the higher post of Inspector. The said representation is said to have been rejected by the respondents. The petitioner, thereafter, served a legal notice dated 29.3.1992 and receiving no response, the present petition has been filed seeking a direction for his appointment on the post of Inspector/Accountant/Statistical Assistant. It is stated that the petitioner was B.Com at the time of his appointment and thereafter he improved his qualification as M.Com. In the reply filed, it is stated that the petitioner was offered the post of Clerk which he accepted and he has no right to claim the higher post. CWP. No. 13672 of 1992 -2- It is settled law that the compassionate appointment is not a source of recruitment. The very object and purpose of compassionate appointment is to enable the family in penury to overcome the immediate financial needs. The petitioner was offered the post of Clerk which he accepted without any reservation and joined the service. The only ground which is sought to be projected in the petition is that some other persons were appointed as Inspectors on the compassionate appointment. Except their names, no other details have been given about their qualifications etc. Be that as it may, the petitioner having accepted the appointment cannot claim the appointment on a higher post. A similar issue has been considered by this Court in CWP No. 447 of 2000 decided on 29.5.2009, wherein following observations have been made:- “ In view of the aforesaid legal position the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. Firstly, he accepted the appointment as Class-IV without any reservation rather he grabbed the opportunity and sought the employment even after 13 years of death of his father, when there may not be any financial crisis in the family. Secondly, even after acceptance of the appointment, he kept quite for 6 years. The first representation was made by him in the year 2008, which was followed by a legal notice. During 6 years after his appointment, he never raised any objection to his appointment against Class-IV post nor moved the authorities for seeking appointment on a higher post. There is no vested right in the petitioner to seek appointment against the higher post”. It is now twenty years petitioner is working on the post. There are persons senior to him. Giving higher post at this stage amounts to promotion ignoring the seniority etc. It is impermissible under law. In view of the above circumstances or otherwise, there is no merit in this petition, which is accordingly dismissed. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 10.5.2010. lucky