IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 13890 of 2007 DATE OF DECISION : 06.08.2009 Pavitra Devi .... PETITIONER Versus State of Haryana and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. R.N. Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms. Kirti Singh, AAG, Haryana, for respondent No.1. Mr. Gaurav Mohunta, Advocate, for respondents No.2 to 4. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral ) The petitioner, who is widow of the deceased employee, has filed the instant petition for quashing the order dated 28.2.2007 (Annexure P-3), whereby her request for ex-gratia appointment under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of Deceased Government Employee Rules, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as `the Rules of 2003') has been rejected. Undisputedly, husband of the petitioner expired on 15.3.1998. Concededly, all his retiral benefits have already been paid to the petitioner, CWP No. 13890 of 2007 -2- but it is the case of the petitioner that the same were paid only on 12.2.2005 and no interest on the delayed payment has been paid. So far as the ex-gratia appointment is concerned, it is stated in the written statement filed on behalf of respondents No.2 to 4 that the the petitioner was asked to submit documents for ex-gratia appointment, but when she did not respond, her case was closed and she went to Nepal. It is further stated that after closing the case of the petitioner for ex-gratia appointment, her case cannot be considered in terms of clause 3 of the Rules of 2003. Faced with this situation, counsel for the petitioner states that let this petition be disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make a representation for grant of interest on the delayed payment of retiral benefits and the same may be ordered to be decided expeditiously. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make a representation to respondent No.3 within a period of month with regard to the payment of interest on the delayed payment of retiral benefits of her husband and if any such representation is made within the stipulated period, the same shall be considered and decided by respondent No.3 in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months. August 06, 2009 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) ndj JUDGE