^^^•J-.J ^3^^ Oi H? ciii a(, .Ql —y—( 3J. =3' a< : —f.-rv •ay -QJ "4 ^ ~~E», -0) —BaBI. fl ~' af 63S ~1^ :iEfi a —V—t -Ei <jq B «sd •^CI Ej 3^t! ^^ t< 3] 3:iX ~1. 'vl —1&1 j4'\y <.'-4 ""y-J^ -q: iS, ••"Ht' ••• ~$. Sl' St :S S^—t & ffl r\3 —*' •^3 6C].PI ^ .BSf ^-a' sn^i-^i R-lid; SV^ sti^iqi ^rft^ c': -svf ^wMtt, ^Tfl-y'iic, (««ii'Hi< 3Tr^?T T^SR wflc'ir^KW* 16^ 200 1^5^CT' sn^r?:R!iWtifei 8B: Hoa'ble Shri Maniadra Mlohan Shri^rastava, J. 17.03.a010 Shri Chandresh Shriyasljava Shri Bhaskar Payasi, Paijiiel pepto By this petition, the 22.8.1997 (Annexurc A-l), b compasslonate appoiutnient rejected. Leamed counsel for thel whoUy dependeat on her dece4 working as Extension Officer. petitioner became entiti^ for fhere was no ofh.er ineiaber in| dependent upon 1iim. However, on beias provisiou for the saiue under on fhe date of death of the petitioner fairly submits fhat fhose policies for grant of appoiatuient to sister of fhe de Respondents ia their rei 'f>l'<fd''fl'-1 *iwini'?'fs^t <["itsi< •^aiNitsD^t i, coungel for fh.e petitioner. Law}rer for fhe State. itioner has challenged the order dated y which her appUcation for grant of ipon deafh of her brotlier, has been petitioner subnuts that petitioner was ^sed brofher-Komal Ram Sori, who was PU account ofhis death on. 22.8.1994, ^raat of conipassionate appoiatiaent as fhe fanuly an.d fhe petitioner was fiilly encluired as to whetiier fb.ere was anv tfie relevaut poUcies which were ia force povt. servant, learaed counsel for the [fhere was no speci&c provision under coinpassionate appointment graatui^ (|;eased-einployee. t|um have sought to justify the order of !_.. rejection by placing retiaace 04 a subsequent Circular dated 1.5.2000 (Annexure R-1). 1J- ^g-HC-22 SII^I^T 1^:ria;3ll|RT yt)H\^ ^fsd -^sj ^iwicf^, ^Tfl^ii<», r««yii'Mi< 'qT()rlTSh*<lch •M 200 ^re^sr' STI^I ^RIIW ^rfN The subinission of leamt view of Circular dated 1.5.200Q was justified is inisconceived. inake out a case that she wd cbltllcl-'il-l IIIlRTt"'? ftIA tf^R^R ^; sifigii sn^i pd counselfor fhe respondents that ia ^ earlier order of rejection of application However, as the petitioner could not ^s entitled for grant of coinpassionate appoiatnient on the basis of fb|e poUcy of conipassionate appoiatuient existmg on the date of death o} to the petitioner. Pelition is fherefore liabli dismissed. Govt. servant, no relief can he graated to be disirdssed and is accordinglv Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge