IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.1992 of 2010 Date of Decision: September 16, 2011 Daya Rani ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr.S.K.Biriwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana, for the State. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. The husband of the petitioner Karnail Singh was working as T-Mate. His services were regularised on 16.1.1996. Unfortunately he died on 29.7.2002. As per the petitioner, respondent No.3 sent a proposal for employment of the petitioner or her family members on 19.9.2002. On 6.3.2003, option regarding employment or financial assistance was sent to the petitioner. The petitioner opted for employment rather than accepting financial assistance. The petitioner also filed two affidavits showing that she had opted for service. The demand of service as well as financial assistance was rejected on 13.12.2007. The view is that demand for appointment is not made out and only grant of financial assistance can be considered. The petitioner had made reference to 2003 Rules to make a claim for appointment. Respondents have filed reply giving detailed reasons why Civil Writ Petition No.1992 of 2010 : 2 : appointment cannot be now given to the petitioner. However, the respondents have very categorically stated that the petitioner was called in person to furnish requisite documents on 31.12.2007, but she did not respond. She was again requested on 24.7.2008, but she still did not submit the requisite documents. It is stated that the Department is still willing to release the amount of compassionate assistance to the petitioner within 15 days of the submission of the requisite documents. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to ex-gratia appointment in terms of the Rules as applicable at the time of death of her husband. The issue as to which rule would apply in such like cases is under consideration of Full Bench of this Court. The petitioner, however, if so advised would be at liberty to approach the respondents to complete the formalities if she is interested in getting the compassionate assistance in terms of the rules, as has been offered to her. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction that petitioner, if so advised, may complete the formalities for grant of compassionate assistance. However, the petitioner's right to seek appointment in this background, as noticed above, at this stage cannot be adjudicated. The petitioner may invoke her remedy after the decision of Full Bench in case she still wants to get ex-gratia appointment. September 16, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE