C.W.P.No.17675 of 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No.17675 of 2007 Date of Decision: May 06, 2008 Smt.Dutt Kumari .......Petitioner Versus The Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran and others .......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL Present: Mr.Devender Punia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Narender Hooda, Advocate for the respondents. ... HEMANT GUPTA, J. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court in the nature of certiorari seeking quashing of the order dated 22.10.2007, Annexure P4, whereby monthly financial assistance granted to the petitioner as per Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of the Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as '2006 Rules') has been withdrawn and recovery of an amount of Rs.60,680/- has been ordered to be made after adjusting the pensionary benefits. Shri Gagan Bahadur, husband of the petitioner, working as C.W.P.No.17675 of 2007 -2- Assistant Lineman with Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam (hereinafter referred to as 'the Nigam') died on 25.4.2003. The respondent-Nigam has adopted Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of the Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as '2003 Rules') whereby ex-gratia appointment on compassionate ground to an eligible member of the deceased-employee is to be granted subject to availability of a post within 5% direct recruitment quota posts. The petitioner applied for appointment on compassionate ground against Class-IV post after the death of her husband. On 29.6.2006, her claim for appointment on compassionate ground was rejected as no post became available for the petitioner in view of her seniority of the candidates seeking appointment on such grounds. But soon thereafter, 2006 Rules were notified on 1.8.2006 and were adopted by the Nigam. In view of the 2006 Rules, the claim of the petitioner for grant of financial assistance was considered on a representation and allowed vide office order dated 12.10.2006, Annexure P3. It was thereafter, vide communication dated 22.10.2007, the order granting financial assistance was revoked and an amount of Rs.60,680/- was ordered to be deducted from the pension of the petitioner. It is the said order which has been challenged in the present writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that in terms of 2006 Rules, the petitioner is entitled to monthly financial assistance, therefore, the revocation of such financial assistance is illegal and arbitrary. It is not disputed that on 29.6.2006 i.e. prior to framing of 2006 Rules, the claim of the petitioner for compassionate appointment was C.W.P.No.17675 of 2007 -3- declined, thus, it was not a pending case which was open for re- consideration in terms of 2006 Rules. Since the claim of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground was rejected prior to framing of 2006 Rules, the petitioner is entitled to lump sum financial assistance of Rs.2.5 lacs in terms of 2003 Rules. A Division Bench of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.15304 of 2006, Jagdish Versus Uttar Haryana Bijli Nigam and another, decided on 26.2.2008 and in Civil Writ Petition No.6005 of 2007, Kuldip Kumar Versus Managing Director, Uttar Haryana Bijli Nigam and another, decided on 12.3.2008, has considered the various judgments of this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court and held that the petitioner has no right to seek appointment on compassionate ground on the basis of the instructions applicable on the date of death of deceased employee. The consideration for appointment on compassionate ground is not a vested right. The object of offering employment on compassionate ground is only to enable the family to get over the financial crises which it faces at the time of the death of the sole breadwinner. In Civil Writ Petition No.15156 of 2006 (Mukesh Vs. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and others), we have upheld an option given to the petitioner for grant of financial assistance to the tune of Rs.2.5 lacs prior to the commencement of 2006 Rules. It has been held that after the expiry of validity of seniority list, the respondents are justified in law in offering ex-gratia financial assistance. In the present case, the petitioner was paid cash financial assistance in terms of 2006 Rules. The petitioner has been paid financial benefit under bonafide interpretation of the Rules. But from the Rules as C.W.P.No.17675 of 2007 -4- interpreted by this Court, she is not entitled to such monthly cash financial assistance but lump sum ex-gratia financial assistance. The petitioner is a widow having lost her husband some time past, therefore, we are of the opinion that though the monthly financial assistance was given wrongly, but the action of the respondents to recover an amount of Rs.1,17,254/- vide order, Annexure P4, is wholly unjustified. Therefore, in the peculiar facts of this case, we order the respondents to release the ex-gratia financial assistance of Rs.2.5 lacs forthwith and also not to deduct any amount of monthly financial assistance disbursed to the petitioner in bonafide interpretation of the Rules. Therefore, we allow the present writ petition, direct the respondents to release a sum of Rs.2.5 lacs within one month from today and also release the arrears of pension from the date due and payable to the petitioner without adjusting any amount of Rs.1,17,254/-. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. ( HEMANT GUPTA ) JUDGE ( MOHINDER PAL ) May 06, 2008 JUDGE SRM